Rules for the "2 by 4" Extra Challenge:
1) Keep yourself safe.
2) Start outside your location (could be your home, school, workplace - it's up to you).
3) Travel two units straight in one direction.
4) Turn to your right and travel 4 units.
5) Whereve you are, so long as you are safe, your mission is to creatively interpret your surroundings. Bring back and post photographic evidence to your website that you were actually there. Make the absolute best of whatever you find, no matter the subject or how mundane it might seem.
So, I left my house, walked two streets east, then fours streets south and ended up at a T-junction. I'd decided to take my 70-200 (on the basis that I'd have a longer reach if there wasn't anything interesting immediately in front of me) and vowed that I'd stand in much the same spot until I got a shot I was happy with. I came home with various pictures of leaves (all crap), some passing pedestrians (equally crap), some poorly focussed cars, buses and taxis (yes, you've guessed it), and this shot: which, all things considered, I'm happy with. And I'd be interested to see whether you can identify how it was done :-)
capture date camera lens focal length aperture shutter speed shooting mode exposure bias metering mode ISO flash image quality white balance cropped?
5.44pm on 10/8/04
Canon 20D
EF 70-200 f/4L USM
200mm (320mm equiv.)
f4.0
1/125
aperture priority
+0.0
evaluative
100
no
RAW
auto
no
comment byJunnie at 09:37 PM (GMT) on 8 October, 2004
from a pair of shades? from rear view mirror? i give up. i like the choice to have it in black and white. adds drama.
comment by Page at 09:37 PM (GMT) on 8 October, 2004
mmm. I like this. You can create some wild effects by "zooming' while snapping the shutter. Did you do this here or ever tried it?
comment by John Washington at 09:37 PM (GMT) on 8 October, 2004
Can I have first guess. Is it a view taken from a car wing/overtaking mirror.
comment bydjn1 at 10:07 PM (GMT) on 8 October, 2004
Nope: no shades, mirrors or zooming were involved ;-) It was shot in a car window and what appears to be motion blur is really a depth-of-field artefact; i.e. f4 at the equivalent of 320mm leads to a very shallow DoF.
comment bymiklos at 10:33 PM (GMT) on 8 October, 2004
I like this.
comment byphotoloukey at 10:44 PM (GMT) on 8 October, 2004
so a reflection...interesting. i was going to guess some sort of wild chromasia panning shot. the more i see of these 2x4 pics the more i want to go out and try one. once again, you've given me inspiration. the contrast is very nice.
comment by nogger at 11:53 PM (GMT) on 8 October, 2004
Looks like it was taken from a car mirror (the passenger side). The vehicle looks like an ambulance (at least the American versions). Interesting shot. Glad you're enjoying your new toys.
comment byJarod at 03:21 AM (GMT) on 9 October, 2004
My guess is this is shot through some pair of glasses and the behind the lens is some reflective mirror lens that's cracked and has th reflection of the building behind you. The white blur to the right is someone passing by.
comment byUrbanite at 10:10 AM (GMT) on 9 October, 2004
Is it an ice cream van ? It looks like it's reflected in something but I can't work out what.
comment byAlessandro at 11:39 AM (GMT) on 9 October, 2004
INTERESTING, BUT UNFORTUNALLY IT'S A A PHOTO WITH A BIG IMPACT AND NO SENSE; WE CANNOT DISTINGUISH A SINGLE ELEMENT WITH SENSE, ZOOMING IS MAYBE THE ONLY POSSIBLE LECTURE KEY. THIS TIME THE EXPERIMENT WAS TO ECCESSIVE.
comment bydjn1 at 08:44 PM (GMT) on 9 October, 2004
Jessyel, Jarod and Urbanite: see above ;-)
Alessandro: there's NO NEED TO SHOUT!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)
OK, so perhaps this wasn't one of my best efforts but I was somewhat constrained by the rules for this challenge. I could have come home again and wandered off in a different direction, or I could have done it from work, but I decided I wanted to do it in one go rather than have multiple attempts (which seemed a bit like cheating given the nature of the challenge).
comment byEric Hancock at 03:51 PM (GMT) on 11 October, 2004
Nice!
comment bybrandon at 03:31 AM (GMT) on 13 October, 2004
I disagree with Alessandro. I think the image works effectively without the need for "sense" and "distinguishing elements". Abstract art is often represented that way - and I feel this would fall under the veil of abstract photography. In my opinion, if a the aperture was closed down, it would be much more distracting - so this was indeed a good choice.
Photo Friday is a little different this week:
Rules for the "2 by 4" Extra Challenge:
1) Keep yourself safe.
2) Start outside your location (could be your home, school, workplace - it's up to you).
3) Travel two units straight in one direction.
4) Turn to your right and travel 4 units.
5) Whereve you are, so long as you are safe, your mission is to creatively interpret your surroundings. Bring back and post photographic evidence to your website that you were actually there. Make the absolute best of whatever you find, no matter the subject or how mundane it might seem.
So, I left my house, walked two streets east, then fours streets south and ended up at a T-junction. I'd decided to take my 70-200 (on the basis that I'd have a longer reach if there wasn't anything interesting immediately in front of me) and vowed that I'd stand in much the same spot until I got a shot I was happy with. I came home with various pictures of leaves (all crap), some passing pedestrians (equally crap), some poorly focussed cars, buses and taxis (yes, you've guessed it), and this shot: which, all things considered, I'm happy with. And I'd be interested to see whether you can identify how it was done :-)
camera
lens
focal length
aperture
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
ISO
flash
image quality
white balance
cropped?
Canon 20D
EF 70-200 f/4L USM
200mm (320mm equiv.)
f4.0
1/125
aperture priority
+0.0
evaluative
100
no
RAW
auto
no
from a pair of shades? from rear view mirror? i give up. i like the choice to have it in black and white. adds drama.
mmm. I like this. You can create some wild effects by "zooming' while snapping the shutter. Did you do this here or ever tried it?
Can I have first guess. Is it a view taken from a car wing/overtaking mirror.
Nope: no shades, mirrors or zooming were involved ;-) It was shot in a car window and what appears to be motion blur is really a depth-of-field artefact; i.e. f4 at the equivalent of 320mm leads to a very shallow DoF.
I like this.
so a reflection...interesting. i was going to guess some sort of wild chromasia panning shot. the more i see of these 2x4 pics the more i want to go out and try one. once again, you've given me inspiration. the contrast is very nice.
Well, poo! I never got a chance to guess. :-)
Looks like it was taken from a car mirror (the passenger side). The vehicle looks like an ambulance (at least the American versions). Interesting shot. Glad you're enjoying your new toys.
My guess is this is shot through some pair of glasses and the behind the lens is some reflective mirror lens that's cracked and has th reflection of the building behind you. The white blur to the right is someone passing by.
Is it an ice cream van ? It looks like it's reflected in something but I can't work out what.
INTERESTING, BUT UNFORTUNALLY IT'S A A PHOTO WITH A BIG IMPACT AND NO SENSE; WE CANNOT DISTINGUISH A SINGLE ELEMENT WITH SENSE, ZOOMING IS MAYBE THE ONLY POSSIBLE LECTURE KEY. THIS TIME THE EXPERIMENT WAS TO ECCESSIVE.
Jessyel, Jarod and Urbanite: see above ;-)
Alessandro: there's NO NEED TO SHOUT!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)
OK, so perhaps this wasn't one of my best efforts but I was somewhat constrained by the rules for this challenge. I could have come home again and wandered off in a different direction, or I could have done it from work, but I decided I wanted to do it in one go rather than have multiple attempts (which seemed a bit like cheating given the nature of the challenge).
Nice!
I disagree with Alessandro. I think the image works effectively without the need for "sense" and "distinguishing elements". Abstract art is often represented that way - and I feel this would fall under the veil of abstract photography. In my opinion, if a the aperture was closed down, it would be much more distracting - so this was indeed a good choice.
Good work.