I'm hoping to get some feedback from you all. In the last couple of

[ralps]

years I've been more interested in doing these types of photographs. Are these interesting?

[Malva Zebrina]

1. It is interesting to me because I do not know the process

what exactly are you doing with the camera to get this effect?

It is on the verge of being "cubist" like, but not quite there yet.

[ralps]

2. I heard a couple of years ago that David Hockney took bunches of

photographs and created panoramic scenes. I wanted to try and do the same thing with some scenes that I am familiar with.
:hi:

[Xithras]

3. Interesting, but the variation in the exposures throws me.

It's an interesting effect, but when the variation between the photos brightness varies widely it's a bit distracting. The effect is present in all of the images, but is especially distracting in the last one.

Can your camera be set on full manual or lock an exposure setting for multiple photos? What's that do to the quality of the final image?

[ralps]

4. It's a digital camera so I'm not sure what I can do about

the exposure. Thanks for your comments.
:hi:

[ralps]

5. Here is one of my photos that seems to me to be more uniform

as far as exposure is concerned

[LeftPeopleFinishFirst]

6. Well obviously, Hockney is amazing.

I've seen people attempt in vain to recreate what he has done. I say if you can do it, more power to you. Remember to find your own unique way of doing it.

[ralps]

7. I just looked at some of the Hockney photographic collages

and it looks like I have a long way to go. Thanks for your comments.
:hi:

[Be Brave]

8. Have you tried ArcSoft's Panorama Maker?

http://www.arcsoft.com/en/products/panoramamaker/

[ralps]

11. Thanks Be Brave. I'll have to check into it.

:hi:

[NashVegas]

9. you may find this interesting

http://www.caldwellphotographic.com/MosaicTutorial.html

[ralps]

10. Thanks for the information Crisco. I've bookmarked it.

:hi:

[NJCher]

14. very helpful

Thank you, Crisco. Just so happens I'm working in the area of landscapes now so this page is quite interesting to me.


Cher

[ralps]

12. Here is a different variation of the first photo that I created

recently.

[AlCzervik]

16. Is that done on photo merge from photoshop?

i have a series of pictures of the golden gate bridge that i need to photo merge.

[ralps]

17. No, I looked at one photo in the series. Then started to resize it in the

image/resize pulldown menu to see how many pixels per inch a 8x10 photo would be resized to 2x3 (for example). When you do this uncheck the resample image box. For example instead of the image being 72 dpi it might be 200 dpi. Then cancel the image resize and create a new document with the dpi setting that matches the resized image you canceled. The new document should be wide enough and tall enough to fit all the photos you have. Then take each of your photos and drag them to the new document, and fit them together like a puzzle. I usually take my photos so that they overlap. I hope this explanation helps.
:hi:

[Schema Thing]

18. I like this.

[intheflow]

13. I love them! I do something like that, myself.

What I do is take 360° panoramics, at rallies and at scenic spots and lay them out in straight line. But I don't have a digital camera, so I layer the 4x6 prints on each other. I feel challenged by your work to scan in my pictures and play in photoshop. :thumbsup:

I don't find the exposure variations jarring at all. In abstract art, the colors and composition must be balanced, and I think that's achieved in your pieces. My favorites are your top and bottom pictures. The top one because it looks glamorous, and the bottom one is a scene I would photograph. The 3rd one is just too cold, and the 2nd one is every office I have ever worked in. <shudder!>

[GOPFighter]

15. Personally...

...I like the variations in exposure, assuming you're trying to creat art rather than a photograph. Looks like fun, too!

[roguevalley]

19. I really like these kinds of pictures. Very nice and very interesting.

[BlackVelvetElvis]

20. Very interesting.

I suggest you do more. Part of the fun is the exploration of it.
I really like the interior shot.

[TahitiNut]

21. Here're my thoughts, for what they're worth ...

I think the collage technique is fascinating. I also think it's important that it reflect the physical piece, i.e. that it's not just digitally composed but is actually a collage of borderless prints mounted with standoff on a suitable backboard.

I think the subject should be synergistic with the technique. (This is my "form follows function" or "the medium is the message" thinking.) For example, I'd like to see a ski slope (or some angular subject) as a cascaded collage, or I'd like to see the aftermath of an earthquake as a staggered collage (where the elements across prints just don't quite seem to match). I think it's very important that the array of borderless prints cover only the subject matter and there be no print that merely 'fills' out some arbitrarily rectangular array.

I don't think it's mindlessly necessary to have the same exposures. I can think of many reasons not to, based on the subject matter. For example, I can envision a river depicted with a long collage, where the first print is morning and each subsequent print is later and later in the day with darkness falling until the last few are taken at night and show lights on in buildings on the bank or boats on the river. Heck, even a building or array of homes could depict their day-long uses.

As you showed in an example above, I don't think its necessary that the prints overlap. It depends again on the subject matter. I can envision a photo array of a glass skyscraper with rectangular windows in which perhaps another skyscraper is reflected - where that rectangularity (and interior isolation) might be reflected in the gapped collage itself. I can also envision some other subject matter, like basketball players with one taking a shot where the collage of the basket is separated from the collage of players. (That's probably not a realistic subject since it's in motion, but might be accomplished in an inventive way.) The idea is that there's some binding thematic association between separate clusters of collage prints .... farmhouse and barn and corral ... car and traffic light ... wise men and star.

I guess what I'm saying is: "When you get lemons, make lemonade." Take the intrinsic characteristics of the technique (overlap, gap, exposure differences, mismatch, etc.) and wield them in a manner that reflects the subject matter. Consider them as an arsenal rather than anomalies.

Am I making any sense? :shrug: (I'm interested in trying it myself.)


On edit: What if, for example, the office collage that shows various workstations/desks/chairs actually had the same person in each and every position, perhaps even standing next to the same desk where (s)he's seated? It seems to me that could portray something ambiguous: either "busy" or "office clones." (I often find multiple-entendre useful when various interpretations all have an element of interrelated truth.)

[TahitiNut]

22. An afterthought ...

As I think about the basketball scenario, it occurred to me that the original need not actually be separate photos. Let's say we have a very high resolution fast camera and we take a pic of a long arcing shot, like might be attempted at the end of a game, and capture the ball in the air near the basket. We could take that photo and chop out overlapping pseudo-snapshots. We could then make slight chroma/gamma adjustments to those individual snapshots to create slight mismatches. Then we could reassemble them in grouped collages - one array covering the various players on the court and the other showing the ball near the basket. Mounting and depicting the scene as grouped collages would be very interesting. It would convey the 'teamwork' ephemeral - the isolation and overlap of individuals forming a team and the remote result. Make sense?

[ralps]

23. Here is my newest photo

I hope you all like it

:hi:

[Swamp Rat]

24. Oooo! That's really nice!

My favorite so far! The overall shape looks like Nebraska... it would be neat to lay out photos in shapes too. :)

:thumbsup:

[ralps]

27. Thanks Swamp Rat

:hi: :thumbsup:

[smurfygirl]

25. I really like this one.

The clouds in the backround almost appear to be a rock wall. Throws the brain off for a moment. I will have to try this sometime. Very creative and I like the different exposures. Having a tree that appears in three different colors is really neat. Keep it up.

[ralps]

28. Thanks smurfygirl

:hi:

[Longgrain]

26. Thanks ralps is this a combo shot like some of us suggested?

Looks like several different types of weather, times of day, seasons...

Once again, great stuff, I love this idea...:thumbsup:

[ralps]

29. Thanks Longrain

The different exposures, times of day etc. might be because there are over 100 photos in this panorama so it took a while to photograph it. Maybe?:shrug: :hi: :hug:

[intheflow]

30. That's quite striking, ralps!

The tree and the sky are wonderfully contrasted yet balanced. Very nice! :hi:

[ralps]

31. Thanks intheflow

:hi: :hug:

[RetroLounge]

32. Very nice!

It challenges the eye, I think.

On first glance, the tree draws the eye, but the circular drive and the lighter parts draw you left.

nice...

:hi:

RL

[ralps]

33. Thanks RetroLounge

:hi: :pals: