Robert Edney on tue 9 jan 07
We are preparing to set-up a new website and I've been perusing the sites of others looking for good ideas to steal. One thing I've noticed is that the quality of photography varies wildly, and that's a problem on many sites. The other thing that consistently strikes me is the lack of any sense of scale. A 27" high pot can look like a 10" high pot in a photograph -- and the only clue as to size is often in the caption. However -- having done some design work in my time -- I can testify that the average consumer has very poor powers of visualization when only supplied with numeric dimensions. I've come to the conclusion that at least one view of a piece offered online should include the piece set in an environment that provides scale -- and I curious about why we don't see this more often. Every now and then I'll see a photo with a yardstick stuck in the frame, which is about as seductive as a mug-shot. How do you handle this? Any ideas on providing a sense of scale
that are both elegant and don't detract from the piece?
Robert
Vince Pitelka on tue 9 jan 07
Robert Edney wrote:
"Every now and then I'll see a photo with a yardstick stuck in the frame,
which is about as seductive as a mug-shot. How do you handle this? Any
ideas on providing a sense of scale that are both elegant and don't detract
from the piece?"
Robert -
I love the way you said that, and I agree, but I think that good photos of
ceramic work should contain a minimum of distractions, so I would avoid any
sort of gimickry to introduce scale. One solution is to display a pitcher
or teapot with a mug or teabowl - that itroduces scale very effectively. I
guess I don't have much sympathy for someone who's not willing to read the
caption, where the size should be clearly stated. I suppose one solution is
to make the caption bigger, and perhaps make it look like a flashing neon
sign. Just kidding, but I suppose one could slightly increase the size of
the caption font.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Carolyn DiPasquale on tue 9 jan 07
Years ago, a Dansk catalogue included an egg in each photograph to give a
sense of scale.
>On Jan 9, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Robert Edney wrote:
>
>> Any ideas on providing a sense of
>>scale
>> that are both elegant and don't detract from the piece?
>>
>>Robert
Marcia Selsor on tue 9 jan 07
Some people use a quarter.
On Jan 9, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Robert Edney wrote:
> We are preparing to set-up a new website and I've been perusing the
> sites of others looking for good ideas to steal. One thing I've
> noticed is that the quality of photography varies wildly, and
> that's a problem on many sites. The other thing that consistently
> strikes me is the lack of any sense of scale. A 27" high pot can
> look like a 10" high pot in a photograph -- and the only clue as to
> size is often in the caption. However -- having done some design
> work in my time -- I can testify that the average consumer has very
> poor powers of visualization when only supplied with numeric
> dimensions. I've come to the conclusion that at least one view of
> a piece offered online should include the piece set in an
> environment that provides scale -- and I curious about why we don't
> see this more often. Every now and then I'll see a photo with a
> yardstick stuck in the frame, which is about as seductive as a mug-
> shot. How do you handle this? Any ideas on providing a sense of
> scale
> that are both elegant and don't detract from the piece?
>
> Robert
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
> melpots@pclink.com.
>
Marcia Selsor
http://marciaselsor.com
Snail Scott on wed 10 jan 07
At 10:55 AM 1/9/2007 -0800, robert wrote:
> I can testify that the average consumer has very poor powers of
visualization when only supplied with numeric dimensions. I've come to the
conclusion that at least one view of a piece offered online should include
the piece set in an environment that provides scale -- and I curious about
why we don't see this more often...
This is a good idea for websites, or for any
sales/advertising photography. I believe the
only reason we don't see it more often is
that most folks only photograph their work
once, using the set-in-stone etiquette of
documentation photography. In that realm,
added objects or complex backgrounds are
verboten, and even though lack of scale can
be a real problem, I doubt that the custom
will change soon. Advertising is not
documentation, though, and there are no
overseeing authorities to fix standards for
ad images.
Documentation and advertising are different,
and may require different photography.
If you only have one photo of a work
that's gone, then that's that. But, if you
anticipate using images of a piece in an
ad or a website, and scale is important, then
there is no reason on earth to be bound by
the standards of documentation photography.
Shoot the documentation shot, sure, but if
that doesn't say what you want, go ahead
and also shoot some that convey a better
sense of the piece, including scale.
You may not need to do that for every
image, especially if you do many similar
pieces, and you may not want to, but maybe
one to lead off each section of images,
or one right on your home page? The viewer
can extrapolate from there. Think about
clothing catalogs: one sweater will be
photographed on the model, but the other
colors or styles are shown as stacked flat
items, because we can assume that the rest
will look much like it in use: the same,
but different. You get the gist.
When re-staging a piece for advertising,
keep in mind how you want it advertised. Do
you want it to look like the fun table-decor
item everyone wants for parties? Then use
fun props around it (but not too distracting).
Put food on the food serving items. (If they
don't look better that way, maybe you need
to revise your design process.) Should it
look like dignified fine art? Then maybe a
gallery view will convey that. Fake it if
you want to - a well-dressed, good-looking
friend with a glass of wine, admiring it in
a white-painted corner of your studio? Two
pieces of painted drywall make a 'gallery'
for a photograph. ;) A small piece held in
a hand is great, if it's a piece to be
handled. For much work, documentation-style
shots may be perfect, but a supplemental
image or two may make for a better website
or a more appealing ad.
For just a dicreet scale referent, maybe make
up a ruler in the color of your backdrop -
much classier than some old wooden yardstick.
A coin is another classic standby.
Especially for advertising (and that includes
websites, postcards, flyers, etc), you are
paying good money to put your best foot
forward. It's silly to just pull out a stock
documentation image to do that, unless that
image really does everything it should. If
it doesn't, then shoot one that does.
-Snail
Culling on wed 10 jan 07
Hey Robert good question - have wondered a bit myself - how do you tell an
espresso from a french coffee cup !?
I figure for cups, saucers, jugs etc a sugar cube would do it -topical isn't
it!?
Stephanie
> Every now and then I'll see a photo with a yardstick stuck in the frame,
> which is about as seductive as a mug-shot. How do you >handle this? Any
> ideas on providing a sense of scale
> that are both elegant and don't detract from the piece?
David Woof on wed 10 jan 07
Hi everyone, A great example of how the camera "sees" compared to our eyes
with everything we "see" being filtered and made sense of by brain
mechanisms which give us an image compiled from the light impulses entering
and the information we already"know" to be "true" about this object or image
and things like prespective, foreshortening etc. Things closer to the
camera lens appear larger than an identical object set further back, even
slightly. Has a smart camera hit the market yet?
Good example is the great fish shots advertising fishing trips/guides.
Those wee fish are held at arms length toward the camera. Or the proud
fisher is standing just back of the giant tuna or marlin. I utilized this
on past fishing trips to the boundry waters where we would have group
pictures of identical fish and mine would appear much bigger when the shots
were developed back home. Some head scratching how comes by the good ol
boys. gave them something to ponder over beer and "vennerschnitzels" or
lutefisk, ya.
Giant mugs and pitchers anyone?
David
_________________________________
_________________________________
David Woof Studio
Clarkdale, Arizona
Ph. 928-821-3747 Fax. 866-881-3461
________________________________
________________________________
peering over the edge, reverently taking an irreverent look at everything.
_________________________________________________________________
Get FREE Web site and company branded e-mail from Microsoft Office Live
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/
Ric Swenson on wed 10 jan 07
=20
I sometimes use a nice black fountain pen in photograph's foreground if I f=
eel the need to show scale. A coin works well also. I find anything other t=
han the ceramic piece in the pic. to be somewhat distracting however.
=20
Regards,
=20
Ric
_________________________________________________________________
Fixing up the home? Live Search can help.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/search/kits/default.aspx?kit=3Dimprove&local=
e=3Den-US&source=3Dwlmemailtaglinenov06=
Bonnie Staffel on thu 11 jan 07
I have seen the use of an egg which has its own beauty and doesn't detract
as much as a ruler would, IMO. I would think that anything from nature
could also be used, a small apple, orange, a bunch of grapes, make like a
still life painting Use something that might color coordinate with the
glaze, shape or general texture of the pot. Wonder what would look good
next to a Crystal Glazed pot, maybe a pearl, a gem? How about something
with a very rustic rough pot, a small rusty hinge, a bolt, nail. Get
creative here. Tie it in with the type of pot you are photographing. This
might be real fun.
Warm regards,
Bonnie Staffel
http://webpages.charter.net/bstaffel/
http://vasefinder.com/bstaffelgallery1.html
DVD Throwing with Coils and Slabs
DVD Beginning Processes
Charter Member Potters Council
firearts on thu 11 jan 07
I was thinking of putting a hand or two into the pic's for scale.
Anyone else tried this?
Dan & Laurel in Elkmont Al.
firearts on fri 12 jan 07
I will try to reply to this but watch the return address as some how
last time it ended up not being clayart.
Vince, I do not see how helping a customer get a sense to scale of
something I am trying to sell, not display, is a bad thing. I find
your point of view very odd and in a bit a an art sob approach to
displaying work. I find this very insulting. It is one thing to submit
pictures to a magazine as art but a web page intending to sell ware is
not an art galley.
I think a picture of me holding a mug, just the mug and part of a
hand, would work very well and would give scale and look good. Most
advertising you see has people in the add not just some object. The
best shows happy people using the thing they would like someone to
buy.
Try and backup and think what would you do when you were just starting
to sell you pots. Would you have the same attitude, idiots customers,
can't even read! Very few people are going to jump from a text
description to a true sense of scale. Something about a picture worth
a thousand words.
Dan & laurel in Elkmont Al
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Vince
Pitelka
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 6:08 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Scale in pot photos?
I'm a little disturbed by some of the suggestions I have heard about
this.
No, don't put a hand, or an egg, or a ruler, or a ball point pen in
the picture. If the viewer is too lazy to read the caption and see
the dimensions, then you really do not want to court their business,
because they are idiots. Even if they have money, it's not worth it.
Just take good photographs that show your work at its best, and give
the dimensions in the caption. That's all you should be expected to
do. A photograph of your work should never include any distractions.
Give yourself credit for the work you do, and present it
professionally, without any gimmicks.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111 vpitelka@dtccom.net,
wpitelka@tntech.edu http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
______________________________________________________________________
________
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
Vince Pitelka on fri 12 jan 07
I'm a little disturbed by some of the suggestions I have heard about this.
No, don't put a hand, or an egg, or a ruler, or a ball point pen in the
picture. If the viewer is too lazy to read the caption and see the
dimensions, then you really do not want to court their business, because
they are idiots. Even if they have money, it's not worth it. Just take
good photographs that show your work at its best, and give the dimensions in
the caption. That's all you should be expected to do. A photograph of your
work should never include any distractions. Give yourself credit for the
work you do, and present it professionally, without any gimmicks.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Kathy McDonald on sat 13 jan 07
I know it's a "no-no" for professional portfolio's
but nature can sometimes provide scale without actually
detracting from the piece or pieces of work.
I have seen some wonderful photographs of work where nature
was the backdrop and it does give one a sense of the scale
of the work.
Sculpture in parks and garden objects come to mind.
The most effective one I've ever seen was one of a
hummingbird
with wings in motion feeding at a pottery feeder.
Kathy
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG]On Behalf Of
Vince
Pitelka
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 6:08 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Scale in pot photos?
I'm a little disturbed by some of the suggestions I have
heard about this.
No, don't put a hand, or an egg, or a ruler, or a ball point
pen in the
picture. If the viewer is too lazy to read the caption and
see the
dimensions, then you really do not want to court their
business, because
they are idiots. Even if they have money, it's not worth
it. Just take
good photographs that show your work at its best, and give
the dimensions in
the caption. That's all you should be expected to do. A
photograph of your
work should never include any distractions. Give yourself
credit for the
work you do, and present it professionally, without any
gimmicks.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological
University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
____________________________________________________________
__________________
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your
subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/624 - Release
Date: 1/12/2007
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/624 - Release
Date: 1/12/2007
Lois Ruben Aronow on sat 13 jan 07
Just my opinion - the photos I've seen with backgrounds - particularly
nature - were distracting at best and many were just downright disturbing.
Unless you're making garden gnomes, keep them inside in a studio.
Seriously, people who make garden work don't even have their work shot
outdoors.
I agree with the thought that well photographed work, with dimensions
listed, will sell itself.
There is always so much back and forth on this list about how we need to
educate the customer. I really think this is dumbing them down, not
educating them. Feel free to use descriptive words - "miniature" and
"statuesque" come to mind, as well as just listing the volume of functional
work. ("this teapot is perfect for two!"). Sculpture could be described as
"tabletop". Whatever. Everyone here is creative enough to come up with
something.
Don't treat them like idiots, don't be lazy with your descriptions, and talk
to them in print as you would in person.
| |
|
