DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Panorama with People
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 23 of 23, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/22/2018 05:22:45 PM · #1
Panorama with People ยท Standard Editing
Instead of photographing a panoramic landscape, use panoramic techniques creatively to photograph a person or people.

What does this mean, please?

May I have a visual explanation, please?
 07/22/2018 06:16:02 PM · #2
Set your camera to panoramic mode and do a photograph of a person or people (or, of course, do a software-stitched panorama of same). What's hard to understand? What will the end results be? I have no idea :-) What would happen if you did a pano of one of your boys standing close and panning UP from toe-to-head by swiveling the camera? What would happen if you stood in the middle of a moving crowd and shot a panorama *with* the flow? *Against* the flow? I don't know. Let's find out :-) Leave the box and the comfort zone in your wake!
 07/22/2018 10:20:05 PM · #3
I thought it was hard to understand, too. Especially when I did a search on it and came up with images like some of these where one person moved from place to place in a scene and the photographer obviously waited for them to do so. Would something like that fly in Standard, Robert? I don't think that's what you had in mind when you answered Lydia . . . or, perhaps, when you wrote up or read the challenge.

panorama with person
07/22/2018 10:31:03 PM · #4
Are we allowed to repeat people in the panorama?

(Thank you, Nikki.)
 07/22/2018 11:16:46 PM · #5
Originally posted by Lydia:
Are we allowed to repeat people in the panorama?

(Thank you, Nikki.)

Not under the Standard rules. You want a panoramic image with people as the main subject rather than just the(ir) environment.

Personally, I consider "panoramic" to be anything wider than the 3:2 aspect ratio of 35mm film ... and you can crop a single image as well as blend multiple images.
 07/22/2018 11:58:04 PM · #6
Really glad you posted this question, Lydia, and thanks for the answer, General. I mis-led a team member earlier this week . . . off to correct now!
 07/23/2018 12:06:54 PM · #7
Thank you, General!
07/26/2018 05:51:54 AM · #8
Some clarifications: taking more photos and merging them with photomerge happens that the same (only)person repeats several times in the final image. Is this correct?
And could we have links to something that looks like the idea of the creator of the challenge? All to avoid a DNMC
Thanks
 07/26/2018 07:51:20 AM · #9
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Lydia:
Are we allowed to repeat people in the panorama?

(Thank you, Nikki.)

Not under the Standard rules. You want a panoramic image with people as the main subject rather than just the(ir) environment.

Personally, I consider "panoramic" to be anything wider than the 3:2 aspect ratio of 35mm film ... and you can crop a single image as well as blend multiple images.


I would beg to differ with the esteemed council member, but say I was shooting in a marketplace full of people all of whom are moving about? If I happened to catch the same person in multiple frames why would that be a problem? Even with a constant pan panoramic camera/phone as it's moving so can its environment. It's how we got on both ends of a group panoramic photo of our HS class - start at one end and run around the back before the camera gets to the other side. So while I agree that people need to be the subject I believe it would be possible to capture the same person multiple times without violating the rules provided the reappearance of said person/people is organic to the environment.
 07/26/2018 09:37:53 AM · #10
I still have a little bit confusion :)
07/26/2018 10:15:36 AM · #11
Originally posted by JakeKurdsjuk:
. . . So while I agree that people need to be the subject I believe it would be possible to capture the same person multiple times without violating the rules provided the reappearance of said person/people is organic to the environment.


I THINK I agree with this . . . only "think" because I'm not sure I understand exactly what Jake is saying. But what I was asking about was deliberately staged with enough time between the files to be used to allow deliberate re-positioning of a single person. And it seems we all agree that that would not fly under standard editing.
 07/26/2018 10:34:29 AM · #12
what I try to say is that I know two metods to produce a "panorama":
1- with the automatic function directly on camera
2- taking some pictures and then merge them with a program.
In both of this case one or more subjects, specially in movement, could appear more than one time into the finally image.
So I ask if the second point (photomerge) is permitted and if there are restrinctions about this tecnical
I also think that if is request the panorama technique we haven't to crop a photo to obtain this format but shoot with one of the two methods above

Message edited by author 2018-07-26 10:37:28.
 07/26/2018 10:35:54 AM · #13
Originally posted by nam:
Originally posted by JakeKurdsjuk:
. . . So while I agree that people need to be the subject I believe it would be possible to capture the same person multiple times without violating the rules provided the reappearance of said person/people is organic to the environment.

I THINK I agree with this . . . only "think" because I'm not sure I understand exactly what Jake is saying. But what I was asking about was deliberately staged with enough time between the files to be used to allow deliberate re-positioning of a single person. And it seems we all agree that that would not fly under standard editing.

It absolutely would be a violation of Standard Editing rules to allow sufficient time between frames in a pano to reposition the same person in multiple spots within the pano. IMO it would NOT be a violation if, as you were panning North-to-South a person or other element in the image was RUNNING North-to-South and appeared in multiple frames accordingly. It definitely would NOT be a violation if you did a true 360-degree panorama and a person at a fixed location appeared at both "ends" of the pano.

But really, this is vintage DPC: we've offered up a challenge we've never done before and we have no idea, really, what to expect in the submissions. Yet, we have people asking us to more rigidly define the challenge. At the same time, in the past when we have rigidly defined challenges with much more detailed challenge descriptions we have experienced an outcry of dissatisfaction from those who said we are stifling creativity by too-precisely drawing a box around the topic.

As to what and what is not "DNMC", as always most of the entrants and voters will not have read this (or any other) thread on what the imaginary consensus is, and they will do what DPC voters always do, which is to vote as individuals with their own personal preferences and aesthetic leanings :-)
 07/26/2018 10:43:16 AM · #14
Originally posted by Sisto:
what I try to say is that I know two metods to produce a "panorama":
1- with the automatic function directly on camera
2- taking some pictures and then merge them with a program.
In both of this case one or more subjects, specially in movement, could appear more than one time into the finally image.
So I ask if the second point (photomerge) is permitted and if there are restrinctions about this tecnical

As iterated in my previous post:
1. Whatever happens with the automatic function on camera will be legal, basically. There might be exceptions, but I haven't thought of one yet.
2. In a panorama constructed in post-processing, if you deliberately allow time between frames to reposition the same person (or another element) in multiple frames, this would no longer be a "panorama" but instead would be a composite image, and this would only be legal in Extended Editing.

In short, if it happens organically during the creation of a true panorama, it will be legal.
 07/26/2018 10:53:59 AM · #15
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
It absolutely would be a violation of Standard Editing rules to allow sufficient time between frames in a pano to reposition the same person in multiple spots within the pano. IMO it would NOT be a violation if, as you were panning North-to-South a person or other element in the image was RUNNING North-to-South and appeared in multiple frames accordingly. It definitely would NOT be a violation if you did a true 360-degree panorama and a person at a fixed location appeared at both "ends" of the pano.


Which is why I used the phrase "organic to the environment" as it implies a lack of intention on the photographer's part. So I would get that what appears to be the purposeful repositioning of someone in multiple frames could be seen as that and I would agree it deserves a DQ.

What troubles me with what you're saying is that "It absolutely would be a violation of Standard Editing rules to allow sufficient time between frames in a pano to reposition the same person in multiple spots within the pano." So, how long is too long between frames? Are you saying that if I take, say, more than 5 seconds between shots and that allows someone to reposition themselves so they're in another frame then I need to start again or risk a DQ? 5 seconds is not a lot of time, particularly if you're using a tripod, and while I'm by no means a sprinter I can get pretty far just walking at a normal pace in 5 seconds.

07/26/2018 11:53:14 AM · #16
Jake, you KNOW what we don't want you to do: organize up a shoot where you more or less artfully place a repeating element in multiple frames of your panorama. Instead of trying to quantify an arbitrary number of seconds between frames or whatever, how about just adhering to the spirit of the proscription?

Incidentally, here's another case where time-between-frames would come into play: a "panorama" assembled of shots taken between sunrise and sunset would be considered a composite image, and it would not be legal.
 07/26/2018 12:04:09 PM · #17
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Jake, you KNOW what we don't want you to do: organize up a shoot where you more or less artfully place a repeating element in multiple frames of your panorama. Instead of trying to quantify an arbitrary number of seconds between frames or whatever, how about just adhering to the spirit of the proscription?

Incidentally, here's another case where time-between-frames would come into play: a "panorama" assembled of shots taken between sunrise and sunset would be considered a composite image, and it would not be legal.


I understood the intent from the beginning, I just found something in both SC "clarifications" that made me question the content of the response because of the specificity of what was said.
 07/26/2018 01:52:43 PM · #18
Originally posted by Sisto:
. . .
I also think that if is request the panorama technique we haven't to crop a photo to obtain this format but shoot with one of the two methods above


I will go out on a limb and answer this one. In my opinion, a single file cropped to a panoramic ratio (1:2 or narrower) would be officially Validated. So it is not a requirement of this challenge that we use a panorama camera setting OR take multiple frames and merge them in post-processing.

HOWEVER, I would also guess that many voters will deduct a bit for what they perceive to be a single file cropped to a panoramic ratio. Just my guess, of course, and I for one will not be worrying about HOW the entry came to have a panoramic ratio.
07/26/2018 02:00:36 PM · #19
Originally posted by nam:
Originally posted by Sisto:
. . .
I also think that if is request the panorama technique we haven't to crop a photo to obtain this format but shoot with one of the two methods above


I will go out on a limb and answer this one. In my opinion, a single file cropped to a panoramic ratio (1:2 or narrower) would be officially Validated. So it is not a requirement of this challenge that we use a panorama camera setting OR take multiple frames and merge them in post-processing.

HOWEVER, I would also guess that many voters will deduct a bit for what they perceive to be a single file cropped to a panoramic ratio. Just my guess, of course, and I for one will not be worrying about HOW the entry came to have a panoramic ratio.

I have reported the two methods to avoid precisely the crop. Cropping a photo to get a panoramic format is not to use the panoramic technique to create something new with people. Assembling several sequential shots (whether automatic or post) implies a certain difficulty in realizing something interesting. But this is my opinion, not a rule
 07/26/2018 02:01:41 PM · #20
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Jake, you KNOW what we don't want you to do: organize up a shoot where you more or less artfully place a repeating element in multiple frames of your panorama. Instead of trying to quantify an arbitrary number of seconds between frames or whatever, how about just adhering to the spirit of the proscription?

Incidentally, here's another case where time-between-frames would come into play: a "panorama" assembled of shots taken between sunrise and sunset would be considered a composite image, and it would not be legal.


Not to intentionally be a gadfly here, but I do see this as a potentially yawning, lava-filled gap... as an example, years ago I shot a pano at "The Bean" in Chicago. I panned right to left, and unintentionally got a small group of people not once, not twice, but three times. The end result was pretty cool, and completely unintentional. Yet, reading this conversation, I would not submit such a shot, for fear of DQ.
Another line of thought: it's entirely legal in standard Editing to use multiple exposures of a scene to eliminate people (the technique is specifically mentioned in the rules as allowed). Why, then, would we care if a feature, say a person, appeared more than once in a pano?

ETA: Here is the pic I'm speaking of:


Message edited by author 2018-07-26 14:08:24.
 07/26/2018 03:13:47 PM · #21
Originally posted by kirbic:
years ago I shot a pano at "The Bean" in Chicago. I panned right to left, and unintentionally got a small group of people not once, not twice, but three times. The end result was pretty cool, and completely unintentional. Yet, reading this conversation, I would not submit such a shot, for fear of DQ.
Another line of thought: it's entirely legal in standard Editing to use multiple exposures of a scene to eliminate people (the technique is specifically mentioned in the rules as allowed). Why, then, would we care if a feature, say a person, appeared more than once in a pano?

In my responses, I have specifically acknowledged that such a capture would be legal. In other words, panning north-to-south on an object or objects moving north-to-south is just fine, that's one of the areas we'd expect to see.

What crosses the line is when you set up somebody in position A, snap a shot, pan to position B, repose the person, and shoot a shot, and so forth and so on. That's moved over into multi-image compositing.
 07/26/2018 04:02:01 PM · #22
Fair enough, that's clear!
 07/27/2018 12:54:17 PM · #23
I just did a true panorama of one person sitting. I took horizontal shots starting above the head and moved down to the waist. Because the person had a hand extended, I then took the last couple of shots moving over to the side more rather than continuing straight down. CS6 stitched them quite nicely . . . but the result was a very large "hole" in the upper left plus another smaller one in the lower right. So I decided to try Content Aware Fill which I understand is legal in Standard. I got a very funky result with parts of the body and head repeated several times in the holes - quite funny to see what the program decided should go in there :)

This is a challenge in which I expect votes to be all over the place . . . even more than usual. Nothing wrong with that at all. But despite the fact that we are supposed to vote as if every entry is "legal" and "could be validated", some cannot resist letting a judgement call on this matter affect their scoring.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 10:22:04 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 10:22:04 AM EDT.