Ancient Aperture

Saw this image on your Flickr site Declan - another stunner - well done again.

BTW there's nowt wrong with stitching images to produce a wider field of view, it has it's place in producing stunning panoramas imagine yourself facing the pyramids and you want to catch the whole breathtaking view, there is no lens except a fisheye will do that and you end up with a distorted image that looks nothing like what you saw. Here is an example of stitching put to good use - 6 vertical frames were used to produce this with an ordinary 18-55mm lens. farm3.static.flickr.com/2269/1660102200_3eb815cb58_b.jpg - no sorry its not Giza, but it is a modern shrine to money.

Mark, I think you underestimate what our ancestors from 5000+ years ago new and understood about the world around them. It is no coincidence that all the great monuments still standing from that era are astronomically related. Egyptian Pyramids, South American Pyramids, Chinese Pyramids, Boyne Valley complex, StoneHenge etc. Seems to me we lost something along the way (the Churches which followed eradicated and outlawed knowledge for the common man). Maybe the trigger for this was the fact that due to precession the milky way was arraigned around the horizon 5000+ years ago?

Hi John thanks again for the kind word's.Sorry if i sounded as though i was against stiching images,i'm not it's just that i come from an old school background whereby i spent a long time imaging before DSLR came along.Back then as i'm sure you know when you opened the diaphram of your camera unless you were lucky enough to own a pc
and scanner and had commercial imaging software well then that was that.So i guess because of that background before i image i try to set the parameter's such that i have as little post processing do be done to the
image as possible although i do love the freedom of image processing.What i was trying to say to Paul i guess was that if the day ever came whereby i tried to pass of a single image as one that was stiched then i would quit.If you look at Paul's post and i'm sure he did'nt mean anything but it was just how he put it.Sorry for any misunderstanding,oh by the way John great capture with the rainbow.


pj30something wrote:

If it is (as you say it is) a single shot

I agree with you totally Declan - the more you can do in camera the better. Personally I hate doing image processing and try to avoid it as much as possible. I usually only resort to processing when I am limited by equipment or conditions and a better shot is possible from the sum of a number of "poorer" images etc. (HDR is one dramatic example).
Sorry if the above sounded narky - it wasn't meant that way. As long as the technique that was used to produce a shot is revealed then we can take it at its merit. I usually try to detail any "special" effects so that the viewer can make up his/her own mind as to wether its still a valid representation.

Hey John it took me a while to figure out exactly
what it was that i didn't like about processing and
it is the fact that for me at least an image never
feel's finished,but that's just one con to the plenty
of the obvious pro's to imaging processing .Of course
with ccd imaging, processing is a must as ccd have
been designed around processing software and vice versa.