Author Topic: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?  (Read 3346 times)

Bjørn Rørslett

  • Fierce Bear of the North
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 8248
  • Oslo, Norway
Re: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?
« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2016, 09:32:05 »
I'm afraid this - again - only muddles the concepts involved. Anything image-wise coming from a digital camera is digital data. The stacking process samples and massages these digital data points. The source of the digital image(s) to be processed could be from a lens or already in digital form.

Michael Erlewine

  • Close-Up Photographer
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1482
  • Close-Up with APO
    • Spirit Grooves
Re: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?
« Reply #16 on: January 26, 2016, 11:09:53 »
This was an analogy, which is why the word "analog" was in quotes. I will go back and modify the original, so that we can move on. The idea was simply that there is the intact original photo, whether a film image or a digital image, from which we sample, keeping some, but ignoring other parts of the image. I feel the concept was just illustrative, and what I intended as clear, was not clear enough.
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com (articles), https://www.youtube.com/user/merlewine (video tutorials), All-Music Guide, All-Movie Guide, Classic Posters.com, Matrix Software, SpiritGrooves.net, DharmaGrooves.com

simsurace

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 701
Re: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?
« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2016, 11:42:58 »
Ok, it seems I misunderstood the intention behind the phrase. Not so important.

For me, the sampling analogy is helpful in thinking about "how" to choose the focus points when capturing the images.
Simone Carlo Surace
suracephoto.com

Michael Erlewine

  • Close-Up Photographer
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1482
  • Close-Up with APO
    • Spirit Grooves
Re: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?
« Reply #18 on: January 26, 2016, 12:28:09 »
For me, the sampling analogy is helpful in thinking about "how" to choose the focus points when capturing the images.

I intention of the post, aside from the illustrations that probably are too small to be of much use, but which in full-size are useful in looking for artifacts, etc., was to examine my "cage," the parameters that I am caught up in (and can't just ignore) when trying to capture a photo.

There is no one answer, and for every photo, perhaps a different approach may be required. Heaven knows, I try them all, endlessly.

I never think in terms of a finished photo that I would hang on the wall. I have no photos on the wall, nor have I ever printed-out a single photo or had it printed. That’s someone else’s idea of photography.

For me, everything is an experiment to see how far I can push this or that, and I look to see the results in the photo that I see in the eye of my mind.

Obviously, I would like a camera that photographed everything perfectly in focus, and from which I could paint in the degree of focus/non-focus for each part of it, shape and shade it to create the impression I intend in my mind.

I am sure I have too many lenses, and somehow assume that gear will lead me into the future. To some degree that is true or it has been true. Gear is important. A fine lens is a fine lens, etc.

At this point, I feel that I should try some other forms of photography than just close-up. I have been there, done that, and mastered enough to know my way around with a camera and lens. Perhaps I will look into landscape, mid-range, or just whatever looks interesting.

My idea of a photographer who is totally skilled in the “find what’s interesting” department is Ming Thein. IMO, he is the best of this generation, overall. He sees exquisite photographs… everywhere.

I need to find my equivalent of that. Other than plants, etc.,  I have never even tried to express what I see in my day-to-day life, and I see very vividly. I just have never jumped into the swimming pool… yet.
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com (articles), https://www.youtube.com/user/merlewine (video tutorials), All-Music Guide, All-Movie Guide, Classic Posters.com, Matrix Software, SpiritGrooves.net, DharmaGrooves.com

ColinM

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 683
  • Bristol, UK
    • My Pictures
Re: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?
« Reply #19 on: January 26, 2016, 19:35:35 »
Have you tried action much before Michael?
It's a broad topic, with maybe enough challenges of technique (as opposed to equipment) to pique your interest?

Michael Erlewine

  • Close-Up Photographer
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1482
  • Close-Up with APO
    • Spirit Grooves
Re: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2016, 20:07:08 »
Have you tried action much before Michael?
It's a broad topic, with maybe enough challenges of technique (as opposed to equipment) to pique your interest?

Years ago, of course. I am getting a little old for it and am more interested in composition these days. I am definitely going to look around this year a bit.
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com (articles), https://www.youtube.com/user/merlewine (video tutorials), All-Music Guide, All-Movie Guide, Classic Posters.com, Matrix Software, SpiritGrooves.net, DharmaGrooves.com

Bill De Jager

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 334
Re: Shooting One Layer or Few/Many Stacked Layers?
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2016, 07:03:50 »
The obvious rebuttal to my previous post, which now is painfully clear to me, is that any digital capture system with a properly functioning lens is going to have a real image projected onto the sensor by the lens, not just in the case initially outlined by the OP.  So my previous point is spurious; I was not thinking clearly last night.  :-[