Ultra-wide angle (UWA) and aquascaping

[Stu Worrall]

incidentally 50mm is what the landscape institute are making their standard measure for when they do visual value assessments because it's the closest to the human perception of depth.

That's interesting. 50mm with what size film/sensor?

I'm unsure off hand, it's in my Vis-qual guidebook somewhere, It goes as far as specifying the exact level/height the lens centre line should be from the ground so it'll be in there somewhere.

its 50mm on a full frame so around 30mm on crop depending on your make of camera.

Im not sure you could limit the use of UWA in competitions when Amano uses it himself in some of this shots by the look of them. (not sure whether its UWA on an SLR or the large format equivalent he uses?)

eg from the 2011 ada calendar - from the angle im assuming this is UWA? (image from here - http://www.adana.com.sg/)

When you take inspiration from these images you do tend to want to re-create them.

The other thing is having the space to take images of a tank. Id imagine youd have to be pretty far away from a 120cm tank to take a competition shot at 50mm so it would restrict people with small rooms. UWA comes into its own here as you can be close to the tank. You can also hold the hairdryer while you take the shot with the camera on a tripod

There are also some ultrawide compacts coming on the market now although for compact they call anything under 25mm a UWA so not sure if they compare to 10mm on crop or 16mm on full frame?

I dont think UWA should be restricted but I also dont think that taking a comp image at a normal focal lenght like 50mm should be a disadvantage but the problem is that we will never see what goes on behind closed doors when judging (with george being the exception 😉 )

Perhaps the exif data should be entered with the photos so that the judges know what the focal length was when taken but then all judges would need to have an understanding of what focal length actually is as I doubt they are all photographers too?

 

[Mark Evans]

Perhaps the exif data should be entered with the photos so that the judges know what the focal length was when taken

I've said for a long time, that In my very honest opinion, and quite possibly a rule that would put many entrants 'out' of the comps, that a RAW image should be entered. This way, you know the image you see, is the image that was taken.

Some really interesting, and mystifying comments on this thread 😵

When you take inspiration from these images you do tend to want to re-create them

So true Stu. And it's images like those above, that inspire me to better myself at least. My feeble attempt at an 'Aqua journal' collection consistently See's me looking over, and over, at the same images...just to learn and take note.

Wide angle for me, is like a side arm. using it occasionally, but more recently, on bigger tanks, they work wonders. Whether that be a 'false' sense of perception or not, they work wonders.





BTW George! carackin shots my friend. 8)

 

[bigmatt]

interesting topic. And for me a couple of issues arise. Firstly, the pics don't make the 'scape any better, but the reality is that aquascaping exists largely online, so the realpolitik is that photography is a necessary evil to show your work to the world. But i also think beautiful photography has become slightly confused with beautiful tanks. For example i don't think Amano would be quite the legend he is if he'd shot his tanks on a camera phone! For me the leveller would be to have a 'full frontal' as the judging shot in contests simply in recognition that this is a pretty expensive hobby anyway, and a further 300+++ quid investment in photography gear, whilst perhaps presenting the scape better, does not make the tank any better. But i also recognise that this is a very difficult distinction to make when the primary reason people get into this is seeing beautiful pictures! Nice shots George, and a great tutorial for those of us hoping to go DSLR in the future! Matt

 

[Johno2090]

I'm with Garuf on this one!

 

[Mark Evans]

I'm with Garuf on this one!

can you elaborate John?

 

[John Starkey]

Wow some really interesting points have been mentioned here,i agree that there should be stricter rules on the shots entered for competition,but for personal use and internet use i think the UWA look is great,the one thing i don,t like about digital photography is digital manipulation to the extreme,because it,s not real to me,

thats my opinion on PP,nice shots George,

john.

 

[Ian Holdich]

agree there John, regarding the manipulation side of things. It would be interesting to see how far things can be manipulated though. As a relative newcomer to the slr stuff and experimentation, using photoshop on a tank shot is quite hard to 'actually' manipulate though (colours maybe and blanking out unwanted objects, i obvious)). Making a shot look deeper in my eyes is fine, as the angle you'd see the tank in real life would maybe give you that impression anyways (if you get me?). I personally wouldn't class Mark's and Georges shots a manipulation, it's the same tank, just taken at slight angles, maybe an angle you'd actually see with the human eye at that angle?. It looks great, it looks arty, if done properly.

 

[Antoni]

very interesting topic, guys!

First of all, great shots George!

Regarding the UWA lenses and the photography aspect of the hobby IMO there are two major points here:

First the photography is a tool - an essential part of the aquascaping, as it is the portfolio of the aquascape, a way to share, represent and save the instant condition of our creations. Also as it is impartial/in RAW format/, it helps to adjust details, the depth of field and perspective, as very often, our eyes are missing something or misleading ourself's from specific elements in the whole "picture". This is due to the physical characteristic of the human eye and the conditions and the ability of any each of us. So everyone sees it different, based on his own abilities and limitations. The human eyes works as a video camera, not like a camera. To perceive an image, our eyes go over the subject creating hundreds if not thousands frames of the subject shifting along the whole picture. Then the brain makes the final "image" of the subject. Also a fact that worth mentioning are the emotions. This could lead to overemphasising details or to missing some. That is why it works very well, if we take photographs and then judge and alter the aquascape. The camera captures everything in still mode and at once, which creates the impartial image.

Regarding the UWA lenses - as a matter of fact the humans' eyes focal length is about 22-24 mm. Therefore what our eyes see can be defined as a wide angle view.

Second: The art aspect of the aquascaping/photography: I believe we all agree that the aquascaping is a form of art. As such it involves recreation of a scene, based on the artists perception of the World and the message he/she wants to send to the observer. It is same with painting: the artist is recreating his own vision for the subject, refracted through his own prism. This is what makes the art so unique. As long as we do not alter the final shots in post production software, no matter what lenses we use and what angle we choose to shoot from, we are recreating our vision of the subject. And this is real, just shown through the authors "eyes" and imagination.

We have all seen pictures of the same subject made from different artists/photographers and sometimes the difference in impression is just enormous. Why is that? I wouldn't say that one of them is cheating.. it is just the way he feels and the way he wants to represent what has seen. And that inspires! Very often absorbed by our daily routine, we do not see things around us, as we are too busy sorting out our problems.Or just we do not have the feeling or the "eyes" for this. Then the art comes in place, as it helps us see those things, to receive the message, to touch our feelings. The art is not an empirical and it has its own rules. And as a form of art, the aquascaping is following those same rules and this is what makes it so unique, divers and addictive. After all, the aquascaping is recreation: a minimalistic version of the nature, represented between 5 glasses in a 3D model, which to complement our eyes and feelings. A good aquascape is aquascape that represents a fraction of the nature in the most natural and harmonious way, which can be only achieved by following the rules of perspectives and depth of field. Rules that the photography and painting are based on.

Regarding the rules for the pictures for the competitions I strongly support the Marks' idea, that the shots should be in raw format, so no altering or post production is made. But apart of that it does not matter what equipment will be used for taking those final shots.

Regards

 

[nayr88]

woah!!

im really trying to get into the photography side of things, mainly inspired by the kind of shots that have been shown in this thread.

i agree with what Garuf is saying, i havnt seen tanks in the flesh that i have seen shot in uwa so i cant say how 'false' the image you see on your screen is to how you see it with your own eyes, but after reading all the comments i think what 'Stuworrel' said is a good idea

'Perhaps the exif data should be entered with the photos so that the judges know what the focal length was when taken'

and also that a 'standard' picture should be included for full tank shot.

but for cool shots and journals i love seeing this shots there real eye candy looking at that last picture you posted mark, i actually feel like im standing in a bunch of ankle high hc looking out on an amazing tropical landscape the rock looks as though id have to use some effort to pull myself ontop of it, and i actually really enjoy these types of shots, im sure the judges ect will realise this isnt a 4 foot deep carpet and a 3ft high rock haha 🙂
sorry if this all sounds like pish, i struggle sometimes to put my thoughts down into words that others will understand haha.

cheers

 

[B7fec]

Great topic George.... Without going over what's already been said, I love shooting UWA shots, I think they add to the creative use of the aqua scape and allows the photographer to flex there creative muscle. I think the use of UWA shots in aqua scaping can truly show off a scape and stand it out from the crowd.

 

[mrjackdempsey]

And who said the camera never lies 😀

 

[a1Matt]

A lot of what I would say has been said already, so I won't repeat that.

The human eyes works as a video camera, not like a camera. To perceive an image, our eyes go over the subject creating hundreds if not thousands frames of the subject shifting along the whole picture. Then the brain makes the final "image" of the subject.

I agree with the above statement and feel that it leads into a point that hasn't been made yet in the thread. I find that a candid video of a tank gives the best impression of how a tank actually looks in real life. Far better than any still image. If I am judging a tank I want to know how it looks in real life. Therefore I think competition entries would benefit from having video\s of the tank included.

I also expect that as people get more experience with producing videos they will learn tricks of the trade to enhance the videos, effectively altering how they look from real life.

 

[bigmatt]

that's a really good point matt - never thought about it like that but completely agree with you. M

 

[B7fec]

Good idea Matt......totally agree that a video would portray the tank in a 'Real life' state much better than photos.

 

[Piece-of-fish]

Videos might be the future of contest judging but not yet.
Who said yo cant use wide angle lens on your HD shooting DSLR though.
And further more video editing could take things even farther from the aquascape than the photo.
Unless as some people said strict rules have to be applied such as shoot from 50mm from the front only.

For me aquascaping is art and art accepts all tools of expression.
Already drooling over canon 10-22mm 🙄

 

[ghostsword]

Well said mate, aquascaping is an art and all is fair game.

As long as colours aren't changed, items liquified, or sizes changed, all should be allowed.

You can't afford a good lens? Rent one or borrow. 🙂


.

 

[NeilW]

On my studies I found these photographers where the beauty of their work lies in the pure 'documentary' perspective and the effort taken to capture the subjects objectively.
Bernd and Hilla Becher

I believe this lovely 'flat' aesthetic was achieved through their large format camera and careful choice in where to take the picture from. I think this sort of perspective/camera setup would be great for judging competitions.

Maybe ADA should get entrants to submit both a 'flat on' image and also an 'arty' image that aims to capture the atmosphere of the scape (so this could use an UWA). In his books the layouts are often over a spread and feature this kind of approach to capturing a tank.

 

[Nick16]

i could do a true masterpiece of a tank, but because i have a crap camera i would get ranked lower than someone who does a lesser scape... aquascaping contests are now a joke which is why i will not enter anymore.

its like the ada competition, unless you use their products, you will not even be considered for the win.

 

[Mark Evans]

its like the ada competition, unless you use their products, you will not even be considered for the win.

I dont remember reading that in the rules 😵 where did you hear that mate?

 

[Nick16]

goes without saying... one day i might enter and just put down i used all their potions and see where i end up


a low budget, DIY style tank winning the ADA... per-lease!