Comments on: 17 Amazing Wide Angle Images

By: DeeCajun

DeeCajun — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:52:17 +0000

In my opinion what is the object of photography?

To come out with a nice photo.

I agree that they are over processed but believe they could have their place somewhere.

I always strive to do what I did back in the days of film, try to get that good raw shot.

I am not liking that I am losing that edge due to digital manipulation.

By: Lewis

Lewis — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:38:26 +0000

The HDR debate in these comments reminds me of the great divide between pictorialism and pure photography.

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:53:47 +0000

I can’t belive that there is hardly any distortion on the edges of these beautiful photographs using a 10mm wide angle lens. What’s the trick? That’s why I havent purchased a wide angle, especially a 10mm, because I thought I would get the fish bowl effect.

By: Bob L

Bob L — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:47:17 +0000

Can anyone recommend a wide angle for my Nikon D90?

By: Bob L

Bob L — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:45:18 +0000

What’s the difference between a ‘wide angle’ and a fish eye. Is it that a wide angle is just that, ‘wider angle’ and a fish eye is more of a special effect lens?

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:45:22 +0000

I like the streetlight and the interior of the church, but the rooster is an example of bad HDR. Why post an article about wide angles and ruin it with examples of HDR? Seems distracting – just look at all the negative comments.

By: Daniela

Daniela — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:36:06 +0000

I Think HDR is nice but not real, sometimes we forget that natures gives us stunning colours. I love wide angle pictures, this is one i took in a trip in my country, Argentina, its a 18mm shot, i hope you like it!

By: purrdey

purrdey — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:23:42 +0000

With apologies to Andrys and anyone else put out my the size of the 2 files I pointed to. I assumed the forum would downsize them automatically (given that you can’t see them at full size anyway, where they look rather more impressive.)
I hadn’t said that the first shot was HDR, and you obviously think I should have set up a tripod and taken bracketed shots (not possible, given the venue). Of necessity the shot was taken as a single RAW and ‘retro-processed’ by cloning to 3 TIFs and then passing through Photomatix. The subject was incredibly bright, but I’d be happy to send you the EOS40D .CR2 file if you think you can improve on it.
But having looked at some of the shots on your website, I’m reminded to make another point re ultra-wide angle lenses which is that vertical distortion is almost always a problem, at least in architectural shots. Most people seem content to live with this, and make no attempt to correct it. My second shot looks truly weird uncorrected – although I can imagine some people finding the shape of the corrected version a bit novel.

By: devi

devi — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:20:14 +0000

what is HDR? I do not like to add colour etc to teh photos I have, except perhaps a bit more brightness.
Sort of feel it is not “natural” to add colour.

By: Andrewdt

Andrewdt — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:37:31 +0000

Please Leo – I have to read more of your work (you say you are a freelance journo). This thread started to disintegrate earlier with all the infighting but my oh my did Leos comments make me laugh! Now back to grumpy faced work….