 Posted 1/29/2008 5:15:54 PM
|
|
|
|
Can someone better define Panorama? The site defines Panorama as Wide or 360 degree views of the subject. Seems like some members are taking some liberties with this definition. I've always thought of panos as a photo created from multiple photos stitched together.
|
|
|
Posted 1/29/2008 6:30:09 PM
|
|
|
|
I noticed that today and yesterday too.
I always thought it was a stitch picture or one taken like Andy Hornby does.
I concur with your thoughts Will!
More clarification needed!!!! 
Susan 
________________________________________
Find pleasure in the simple things!
Susan's Top 24
Susan's Profile
|
|
|
Posted 1/29/2008 6:34:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/29/2008 6:36:34 PM
|
|
|
|
| I'm not a real big stickler when it comes to categories unless it's an obvious violation. Since the site's definition is a bit vague, I hestitate to call this instance an obvious violation. Here's wikipedia's definition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panorama
|
|
|
Posted 1/29/2008 7:53:11 PM
|
|
|
|
I always considered it anything beyond the 2:1 aspect ratio. It has been unimportant to me if it was constructed from 1 capture or 100.
_________________________
Profile - Top 24 - All Images Nikon D70 - Nikon N90 - Nikonus III - Nikkor 20mm - Nikkor 50mm - Nikkor 24-120mm - Nikkor 28-70mm - Nikkor 85mm - Nikkor 70-300mm - Sigma 400mm
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2008 3:59:30 AM
|
|
|
|
There was a thread about this - can't find it.
WE suggested then too that at least a 2:1 Ratio would be an appropriate size for entries into the Panorama Category. There have been many Award winners of this category based on the 2:1 Ratio and it seems to be generally acceptable.
Strictly speaking these entries are probably more Panoramic than Panorama. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramic_photography
Yes my Leaf and Alan J's Bird aren't what you would call standard Panoramas but I think that it's fantastic that they have been recognised with an Award. Being different ought to be nurtured and not condemned!
At the end of the day the voter decides the fate of such images and that ought to be respected.
Edited to add: More of a worry to me are the almost square Panorama entries I've seen.
If you want the rainbow - you gotta put up with the rain.
A conscience is what hurts when all your other parts feel sooooo good! 
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2008 7:16:52 AM
|
|
|
|
| My understanding of the panorama category is that it should be an exceptionally wide field of view. I also found this definition to further clarify: A panoramic photograph is really defined by whether the image gives the viewer the appearance of a "panorama," regardless of any arbitrary technical definition. I mean come on... DA has several categories, ... more than enough to present your work, without having to slip a macro or bird into the pano category. Of course this is just my own opinion.
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2008 7:47:30 AM
|
|
|
|
| The Panorama formate refers to the the crop. DA accepts 2:1. Another site's requirements are 2.5:1. This is regardless of whether it is by crop of one image or by stitching of 2 or more. Two Points: . If an image is not the DA requirement of 2:1 consider entering it in another category. Now then...there are panoramas being done in three sixty that come out square or less than 2:1 via software available so the definition may need to be be changed. . AND. . For pity's sake upload a larger size image of a panorama as the format does not allow a proper view in the vote size.
RoBMy Top Images My Profile
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2008 9:58:26 AM
|
|
|
| | |
