photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
ctfchallenge | all galleries >> Challenge 81: Perspective Disproportion >> Challenge 81 : Eligible > Mother and daughter *
previous | next
22-MAY-2005 Photocat

Mother and daughter *

Teapot Still-life 6.

Quiz: Please make a guess of the sizes of mother and daughter...
and then for a real life comparison
click HERE

Canon EOS 20D ,Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
1/4s f/11.0 at 24.0mm iso400 full exif

other sizes: small medium original auto
comment | share
ctfchallenge25-May-2005 15:52
Cat...what controversy? where? when? how? what are you talking about? :) we are just having fun (arent we Rod?) and somewhere along the process i am trying to explain Rod about the insignificance of the shot portraing real-object-size by itself, as long as it shows subject sizes disproportinately relative to their real-sizes...whether its your "teapot" or my "weed" (golden grass) shot.
unfortunately, i havent been able to make Rod read my comments while he is "sober"...so my ole mate is still confused :) dont worry Rod...this is all about to end in a couple of hours and then you have to think all over again for the new topic :)
-Abstract
Rod 25-May-2005 01:26
I'm not blaming you Cats about referencing object size. I'm blaming Abs it was his weed shot that was off topic:-) that started it, because Abs told everyone the size of the weed & then they said wow:-(
This shot is a lot better Cats:-) well done mate:-)
ctfchallenge24-May-2005 12:15
There are several photos in thic challenge where the sizes were not obvious initially, even after taking a double look untill they were "stated" somehow. I don't think that sizes were stated to get the "WOW". It was done to better explain the disproportion and IMHO they were necessary and very helpful. Only then could one appreciate those photos. I am not the first one. "I didn't start the fire ..... it was always burning..." :-) -Cat
Anyway... did you even notice that I reshot it for you? -Cat
Rod 24-May-2005 08:25
Bleeding L Abs You can't use my shots as though they reinforce my position, they don't. What I say & what I do are totally separate, if I could do what I say my shots would be totally awesome. My shots show my ability with a camera NOT my knowledge of photography. My shots as I have stated a couple of times, (make sure you absorb what you read):-) do not make the brain take a double look. They are just pretty shots that are on topic.....just. But to state to someone the size of an object in a photo to get a reaction has no point at all & is bleeding UnAustralian mate. .......................See wot you started Cats:-)
ctfchallenge24-May-2005 02:53
I can't believe we are having a controversy on the last day of the challenge... Anyway... I have a reshot and posted this one. (just to make Rod and Abs happy) -Cat
ctfchallenge23-May-2005 20:52
Rod, i didnt expect you to write this argument...i already answered this question in my previous comment.
Quoting you: "if we have no way of knowing the real size of the object just by viewing, how does the brain see disproportion?"
In other entries photographs are not giving viewer any idea about objects. brain automatically assumes the size of objects (they are common/known) and thus see disproportion.
- again, your lemon shot, what is in the shot that tells viewer the size of front two lemons? nothing...brain assumes that information that they are of the same size and hence see the disproportion with other lemons.
- one more time...read it slowly Rod...there is nothing in your tree shot that tells viewer the "real" size of the front tree. brain assumes that all tree are of similar sizes...and see disproportion...get it?
now, Cat has used "unknown" objects in this shot...hence, brain needs information about objects' real sizes to see disproportion.
i dont know how much simpler i can put this in words...so now stop harassing me :)
-Abstract
Rod 23-May-2005 19:42
That sounds daft Abs, if we have no way of knowing the real size of the object just by viewing, how does the brain see disproportion? There's no point in using my shots as a reference as I just erred on the side of disproportion & concentrated on getting pretty shots. I could have made the front Lemons really big by going to wide angle but wouldn't have got a pretty picy. How can we tell the front pot here is so small without Cats telling us its size for the wow factor? The shot is on topic but not up to Cats normal standards.............All IMHO......I think:-)
ctfchallenge23-May-2005 13:52
This one doesn't work at all, it seems to me. You know, but we can't tell, that the front pot is much smaller than the back one; our assumption is that they are the same size. Because of its actual size, the tiny front pot doesn't have any sharpness in its manufacture, so it's always going to look oof, even if the focus is perfect. The back pot is way oof. The triangle at the left edge of the table distracts and the shadow of the front pot on the table doesn't add. If you're reshooting, cover the table in black. The lighting, with its strong shadows, is very well done. That's my response to your * - Max
ctfchallenge23-May-2005 13:51
i have to disagree with Rod's comment. with that logic, the challenge will restrict to the common subjects with standard sizes. means, subjects where everybody knows what the size of photographed subject is.
the brain doesnt see much disproportion here because it doesnt know the real size of the front tea-pot but the photographer has done an amazing job showing the disproportion.
i have never mentioned anything about "shot should tell everything"...restriction is to use subjects with their "real" sizes which this shot does.
Rod, i will again use your shots as an example...
- the brain is assuming all lemons are of same sizes and see disproportion (that might not be the case...so no disproportion...so off-topic?)
- the brain again assumes same size trees (may be the front one is huge in reality...so no disproportion...so off-topic?)
Brain sees disproportion based on its familirarity with those subjects. so just by using common subjects you have avoided the step of giving viewer an idea of real subject sizes. on the same note, viewer has to keep the real-sizes of subjects in mind while viewing this photograph.
here, photocat has done hiding the distance between two relative subjects, which portrays disproportion in a much better way.
the only discomforting part for me in this photograph is...all subjects are out of focus. otherwise, disproportion shown in this shot is right on!
-Abstract
ctfchallenge23-May-2005 11:55
OK. OK. I'll reshoot! But I'm NOT giving up my L. L stands for "LOVE this lens". If you use this even once, you'll toss off the 18-55 ;-) -Cat
Rod 23-May-2005 10:16
You should toss that L lens Cats & get yourself an 18-55 kit lens for shots like this:-) The soft or oof makes the shot not really viewable mate. I know after looking at your link how small the front pot is making this shot is a big ask. The shot needs to tell us everything, telling us how small the front pot is with the link is really an irrelevance & should have no bearing on this shot. I think you could have a shot here by using the large pot up front & just the cup in the background looking really small & much easier to get in focus with THAT lens:-) wanna swap?