|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/1/2007
|
It's mainly the impossibility of endless resolution, both for our eyes and the used software/hardware that "creates" such different views. If we take this image we see at a scaling of about 50% something like a house behind the tree, then somewhere at 10% something like a face. And at a scale of 1 by 1 pixel we see a... monochrome square - which obviously reduces again any interest drastically. :-)
Perhaps another thing to mention about thumbs: They are sometimes not very good recuctions of the captured photo, so does anybody know what the quality of a reduced size photo depends on? Though UF uses a very good algorithm for creation of the thumbs, it seems that there are also photos that are ideal candidates for thumbs that exhibit such a behavior, so is there any kind of rule of thumb (:-)) that says what algorithm to use for the best results, according to the contents of the photo?
Best wishes to all,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Annemette Rosenborg Eriksen
{K:55244} 3/1/2007
|
Good idea;-) It is actually fascinating how different photos can appear depending on the size of them letting us see and focus differently.
Take care
Annemette
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/1/2007
|
Thank you very much Annemette.
So, from now on... I think I could post thumbnails only rather than photos! ;-)
A nice day and all the best,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Annemette Rosenborg Eriksen
{K:55244} 2/28/2007
|
I like it as a thumbnail looking like a face covered behind the net of branches.
Best wishes
Annemette
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 2/28/2007
|
Many many thanks for the very encouraging comment, Ali!
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 2/28/2007
|
Thanks a lot for your comment that hits three points at the same time, Nessa!
"Looks like..." - yes, and the question is how this recognition of similarity works at all, when there is no single description of a spider net or any other similar pattern that is exact and definite. Our minds seem to work much more with a kind a "fuzzy" recognition. You look at a certain give spider net, then you remove or displace some of the individual strings, or add new ones, and still the whole thing is... "like a spider net. You can even replace the strings by branches and still the general look remains. A very basic thing in examination of self-similar structures.
"tryinf to detange" - yes, the mysterious wish to analyse ssuch structures despite the fact that they are perceived as wholes! The same mind that knows about the presense of something that doesn't change that much by altering its constituents, still tries to identify the constituents and thus base perceived reality on parts of the whole. So, considering this, we might also answer the question about the purpose of science with: "We can't do different."
And that "hurting" of the eyes - hier we do have an answer. The luminosity differences in such a small distance from dark to light are indeed hard for our eyes, since very adjucent receptors have to cope with great differences of light intensity. In other words the pupil of our eye can no more decide if it should close for coping with the strong light, or if it should open for coping with darkness. Interesting, isn't it? A pattern of very bright and very dark stripes lying very close to each other is almost "impossible" to be captured correctly with any camera - and this impossibility is also valid for our built-in cameras, the eyes, and the built in imaging software, our visula perception in mind.
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Rashed Abdulla
{K:163889} 2/28/2007
|
You managed to make wonderful images out of these branches and you exposed them with very great skill, wonderful details here again and so pleasant photograph to view
www.camerause.com
|
All of the best my friend |
|
|
|
vanessa shakesheff
{K:68840} 2/28/2007
|
Looks like a giant spiders web with the leaves being held capture ..it does hurt the eyes a bit trying to detangle one branch from the other..nessa
|
|
0 
