| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/04/2011 09:53:13 PM · #1 |
Almost every photograph has more than one interesting subjects within its frame. Take three photo's of the same scene. utilize your photography skills along with your camera features show the voters three unique subjects(all three subject must appear in each photo).
Message edited by author 2011-10-04 22:04:30.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2011 10:04:15 PM · #2 |
Whoa, that's SPECIFIC! Interesting idea...
R.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2011 10:05:17 PM · #3 |
| OOOOOOooooooooo I have an idea!!! |
|
|
|
10/04/2011 10:06:48 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Whoa, that's SPECIFIC! Interesting idea...
R. |
I though it would be a challenging task. The photographer will have to use his or her knowledge of focus, DOF, and perspective of the same scene while limiting the range of zoom to allow for all three subjects to be contained in each photograph.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2011 10:17:10 PM · #5 |
| I'm not sure I understand this. Are there three subjects in one image, and those three subjects must appear in all three triptych images? Or is it one subject with three different ways of looking at it in the triptych. Apologies for my density... |
|
|
|
10/04/2011 10:37:16 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
I'm not sure I understand this. Are there three subjects in one image, and those three subjects must appear in all three triptych images? Or is it one subject with three different ways of looking at it in the triptych. Apologies for my density... |
The former.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2011 10:41:28 PM · #7 |
think of a dog, now chop him up into bits, do a head shot, do the tail, do his feet.
am i correct in that thinking?
But all from ONE shot
Message edited by author 2011-10-04 22:41:44. |
|
|
|
10/04/2011 11:11:23 PM · #8 |
| I like it! Unique and challenging. |
|
|
|
10/04/2011 11:16:45 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by JulietNN:
think of a dog, now chop him up into bits, do a head shot, do the tail, do his feet.
am i correct in that thinking?
But all from ONE shot |
NO, NO... That isn't it at all.
Think Mountain in background, winding road leading to it, stone wall in foreground. Take three photos of this scene from the same place, each one emphasizing a different one of those three elements, but all 3 elements present in all 3 images.
One view, 3 subjects.
R.
ETA: In fact, not necessarily from the same place, as long as all 3 elements are in each image.
Message edited by author 2011-10-04 23:17:57.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2011 11:18:22 PM · #10 |
Is the following correct do you think?
Coffee cup, piece of cake, newspaper.
Take 3 pics. Each pic will have one of these items as the main subject, but will also show the other two objects within the same pic.
Combine these 3 pics as a triptych.
Is this the thought, or completely wrong? |
|
|
|
10/04/2011 11:18:39 PM · #11 |
| So it can't be done in one frame? |
|
|
|
10/04/2011 11:26:54 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by JulietNN:
think of a dog, now chop him up into bits, do a head shot, do the tail, do his feet.
am i correct in that thinking?
But all from ONE shot |
NO, NO... That isn't it at all.
Think Mountain in background, winding road leading to it, stone wall in foreground. Take three photos of this scene from the same place, each one emphasizing a different one of those three elements, but all 3 elements present in all 3 images.
One view, 3 subjects.
R.
ETA: In fact, not necessarily from the same place, as long as all 3 elements are in each image. |
Robert you have interpreted the challenge correctly and worded very well.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2011 11:56:47 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by pamb:
Is the following correct do you think?
Coffee cup, piece of cake, newspaper.
Take 3 pics. Each pic will have one of these items as the main subject, but will also show the other two objects within the same pic.
Combine these 3 pics as a triptych.
Is this the thought, or completely wrong? |
Bingo.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2011 11:58:05 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
So it can't be done in one frame? |
nope
|
|
|
|
10/05/2011 10:33:06 AM · #15 |
Well, poop, there goes my naked woman idea!
=P |
|
|
|
10/05/2011 11:15:48 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by JulietNN:
Well, poop, there goes my naked woman idea!
=P |
To be replaced by your THREE naked women shots. Hehe... Just don't let  fotomann_forever hear about this. |
|
|
|
10/05/2011 11:19:20 AM · #17 |
|
|
|
10/05/2011 11:54:43 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
So it can't be done in one frame? |
nope |
??? "Nope" would be the negative of "So it can't be done in one frame?" Meaning it can be done in one frame.
I took the OP statement as  PennyStreet is correct in that it can't be done in one frame.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2011 02:28:14 PM · #19 |
1. Find a scene (this could be anything from cityscape, landscape, portrait, etc)
2. Locate three unique subjects within that scene.
3. Each photographs should draw attention to one of the three subject while keeping all three subjects within the frame ( each photograph can be taken from different POV's)
4. Now take the three photographs and make them into a triptych.
Hope this helps
Scott
Message edited by author 2011-10-05 14:28:55.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2011 02:31:04 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
So it can't be done in one frame? |
nope |
??? "Nope" would be the negative of "So it can't be done in one frame?" Meaning it can be done in one frame.
I took the OP statement as PennyStreet is correct in that it can't be done in one frame. |
"Nope" being shorthand for "No, it CAN'T be done in one frame." It's a fairly universal type of construction, actually.
R.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2011 02:38:49 PM · #21 |
Here is a good example
 |
|
|
|
10/05/2011 03:02:07 PM · #22 |
Like I said
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
PennyStreet is correct in that it can't be done in one frame. |
|
|
|
|
10/05/2011 04:07:04 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Like I said
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
PennyStreet is correct in that it can't be done in one frame. |
|
I'm not arguing whether or not you said it, dude, I'm arguing that most people wouldn't see my "nope" as the negation you imply it is, but rather as a shorthand for your longer version. But it's all good.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2011 04:42:18 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Like I said
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
PennyStreet is correct in that it can't be done in one frame. |
|
I'm not arguing whether or not you said it, dude, I'm arguing that most people wouldn't see my "nope" as the negation you imply it is, but rather as a shorthand for your longer version. But it's all good. |
Nope, I understand what you meant.
nope
ADVERB,
INTERJECTION
1.
no: indicates a negative response refusing, denying, or disagreeing with something ( slang )
[ Late 19th century. Alteration of no1 (probably imitating the lips' emphatic closure) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/27/2025 07:34:41 PM EDT.
