I'm preparing my applications for next year and did a new booth shot. Am I missing anything here? Any critiques? Larry...looking in your expert direction...
Thanks!
You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
Replies
Evan, here's my two cents worth. I like to see booth shots from the approximate perspective (height, distance) of a patron standing in the venue (some feet back from the booth entrance) at the center (l, r). Seeing the side wall displays via perspective distortion is distracting and unnecessary. A straight on, unmanipulated image that is well lit and sharply focused is what my jurors are looking for. They can easily see the arrangement and presentation efforts of the submitting artist, and can anticipate the booth appearance on the venue... which is the point of the booth image. As to the floor... a rug or edged carpet in a complimentary shade is perfectly suitable. Some artists develop their booth around decorative motifs, using tatami mats and the like, but a simple rug can be every bit as effective. T
The wide angle perspective seems to be questionable as Leo points out, and I've heard others point to it as a tunnel image because the rear wall seems so much further back. It does open the angle of the side walls and those pieces become much more visible. Is it that bad? My feel is that as long as the panels are visible and you see the joints, it keeps the sense of scale to size. If this isn't good, then what is the alternative to making the sides show up well? Two corner shots on top of each other in the square Zapp frame?
I'm going to have to work on the flooring. The full size image doesn't look so awkward in my opinion. I'll post the revision when I get to it.
Connie, for comparison I attached my last year booth shot. Similar layout to this one.
image.jpg
You did the same thing I did last year on my booth shot where I used a 15-30 zoom on my Sigma SD14 (APS-C sensor). It does open up the sides at the expense of reducing the back wall height. That same lens covers 35mm format, and I have a Sigma SA-9 film camera I bought specifically for additional use with that lens. The coverage with that combination is truly bizarre where you can stand about two feet outside the tent and get the side walls in their entirety. That one does shrink the rear wall too much and you feel like you're standing in a coliseum. I didn't use it with the film camera, but I may try it again and do some experimenting around to see what could be done.
My gut hunch says place the camera about a foot and a half front from center on the midline of the tent, place the front of the booth at a little inside the frame for the outside shots and do three shots symmetrically, then do the splice. If the struts are clipped off a little way from the edges above, there's no need to worry about alignment during the stitch.
I've wondered about trying a pano stitch with the tripod inside the tent and rotating the camera around so the walls stay about the same size, although probably placing the camera toward the front would keep the back reduced enough that it doesn't look too strange. My biggest concern with that idea is what happens to the ceiling struts in my EZ-Up, although that close in they may just drop out. I've got to get on the ball quickly to get a new booth shot done as I'm looking to shift direction with diptych pieces in completely different subject matter.
I don't find the wide angle look objectionable, but I'm waiting to hear from someone who has their ear closer to the ground in those matters, or better yet someone who does judging. More than likely photographers are the ones with the more extreme lenses and the understanding of how to process the file to get rid of the keystoning and lens aberrations. I'm guessing this is why the wider angle booth shots seem to come more from the photographers.
Take my opinion for what it's worth, zip, what do I know about judging photos? :).
All of which probably won't be noticed in a 10sec look, though some might wonder if other parts of the image have been doctored.
This is so obviously doctored. How about some of you guys who have attended these open juries, or anyone that was at the Zapp conference mock jury. Is this objectionable?
Absolutely. It draws the jurors eyes for the wrong reason. And some show directors may not let it even reach the jury.
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
What could you suggest to make the flooring look more realistic? ...other than finding a better surface to set the booth on, which would be the obvious fix I suppose.
Larry Berman
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next