03-03-10 – Something’s Mising
-
It’s thinking outside the box! I don’t really have a problem with it.
@ravnostic, the camera I used: Fuji S3100, no flash, macro mode.
I think you are probably having trouble because it is an LCD monitor, but I could be wrong. Hope that helps.
I’d lean towards saying using a scanner to create an image is leaning a little to far from photography for these contests.
a scanner is different in that it doesn’t use an aperture and lens to take a still image, it uses a moving lens to create an image of an object.
But is that difference enough to disqualify the method in your mind?
I haven’t seen the image in question, but using a scanner to digitize a photographic image is a bit different than drawing something and scanning it. On the other hand, taking a picture of a painting is legal, though if that were the only thing in the picture there’d have to be a good reason for me to vote for it.
In this case, it’s using a scanner to create the “photographic” image (in this case, a blank piece of paper). soosh‘s comment raises an interesting point about the moving lens. In the case of a scanner/copier, there isn’t necessarily a single exposure, but rather an image created out of many separately scanned/exposed lines that are then assembled by the computer’s software afterward. That’s quite different from using any other camera to produce an image.
That sounds like it would be against the spirit of the contests to me. Brilliant thinking, definitely, but it’s one thing to use a scanner to convert media, and another thing to use it to create art IMHO.
I wouldn’t be butt-hurt if I got outvoted, but I think it’s a slippery slope…
Well there are three of us definitely saying it’s outside the scope, one person saying they don’t have a problem with it, and soosh raising good points, but not stating a specific for or against 😉 To be fair, there apparently are people out there doing “scanner photography”. If there’s a clarification to be made here, I just want to be sure we’re being fair and as consistent as possible.
I think scanner photography would make a good theme, but I don’t think that it should be allowed regularly.
a scanner is different in that it doesn’t use an aperture and lens to take a still image, it uses a moving lens to create an image of an object.
Except that something like a scanning back would be quite similar in operation to a scanner, except that it is most definitely a camera. In the film world, some panographic cameras worked in a similar way.
Plus, I use a camera to “scan” stuff all the time, like this:
Oh, for my “train” picture, I forgot to mention a bunch of stuff that is missing:
The first car is missing brakes.
The middle car is missing: Driver, steering wheel, seats, engine, brakes
last car is missing steering wheel and engine. And a wheel.
a scanner is different in that it doesn’t use an aperture and lens to take a still image, it uses a moving lens to create an image of an object.
Except that something like a scanning back would be quite similar in operation to a scanner, except that it is most definitely a camera. In the film world, some panographic cameras worked in a similar way.
Plus, I use a camera to “scan” stuff all the time, like this:
that’s pretty close to making me change my mind, but I’m not there yet. I think you get a different thing with a scanner than with a camera. I’ve done scanner art, it’s awesome with say a whole bunch of mixed wildflowers. but I don’t know that it’s photography. maybe it is. I’m honestly not sure. Also I’m high as a weather balloon, so maybe this is the time to go listen to Coltrane rather than obsess on terminology.
that’s pretty close to making me change my mind, but I’m not there yet. I think you get a different thing with a scanner than with a camera. I’ve done scanner art, it’s awesome with say a whole bunch of mixed wildflowers. but I don’t know that it’s photography. maybe it is. I’m honestly not sure. Also I’m high as a weather balloon, so maybe this is the time to go listen to Coltrane rather than obsess on terminology.
What about putting your flowers on a piece of glass, and shooting that glass from below?
(Hmm, if that was shot with a gun, and then shot with a camera a few milliseconds later, that could also be interesting)
I think part of the problem is that at a high level, digital photography and scanning are similar:
Both take a physical object, and applying light bouncing off the object through a lens, projecting onto a sensor to create a digital image.
again, to my mind the difference is between the snap-pop of the mirror folding out of the way, the aperture opening and the exposing of the film or sensor to a given scene and the back and forth scan that is occurring with scanning.
both can be digital imagery, but to me, one is scanning, and one is photography.
I will allow that scanning backs blur the two. hopefully someday I’ll be rich enough to fully comprehend what’s involved there.
I’m going to have to look into scanning backs more, but with a scanner, it isn’t a single exposure but rather thousands of exposures, line by line, that are then reconstructed into a single image. On a technicality, our general rules require a single exposure, and it would seem a scanner doesn’t 100% fit that. Scanning in a print photo or film negatives are allowed because that’s a media conversion, not creating an entirely different image.
On the other hand, are medium format scanning backs really scanning line by line during the exposure? I figured they worked pretty much like any other digital back where the shutter opens and they capture the image digitally during the very short time the shutter is opened. Definitely need to look into that more…
- The topic ‘03-03-10 – Something’s Mising’ is closed to new replies.
.
