Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
2002 Ships of the Line Calendar
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mojo: [QB] Ok, first of all I appreciate all the comments! Next I'm going to speak out regarding the considerable amount of flak I've gotten about images in the 2002 calendar... Simply put, I wanted to do something different. Something that has never been done with Star Trek ships before. I was in a bookstore looking through photography books, looking at all the wonderful, artistic pictures and I thought 'why hasn't anyone ever portrayed science fiction this way?' Where was the black and white and creative use of color and blur and other staples of inventive photography? It's always about getting the right exposure and making the shot look cool and that's it. Mind you, I LIKE that sort of thing, but after consuming it for 25 years and producing it for 9 I wanted to try a new approach. So the idea behind the 2002 calendar was that the Federation hired the best photographers in the 24th century (maybe they're from National Geographic) and asked them to photograph the ships of the line through their lens. So, for the first time, the images are NOT about the ships, but about the photograph. I wanted to portray pictures of the ships as artwork, not just the same old picture of a ship with neat lighting. To be fair, Rob warned that not everyone would take to the idea, and that there are a lot of people out there who WANT normal pictures of spaceships against black backgrounds... but he agreed it would be fun to try something different. Not all of them are a success. No one seems to like the Defiant image, and I admit that was one is a dud. I really like the bold shapes and study in contrast that the Unicomplex and Utopia P. shots employ, but few others do. On the other hand, what I find interesting (and gratifying) is that, of the other images, everyone has a different favorite. Some love the workbee shot, others hate it. Some prefer the Klingon burning up and and (believe it or not) a few people have picked the blurry, attacking Romulan ship as their favorite image! This simply reflects the very subjective artistic tastes that each individual has, and I am proud of the diversity we achieved. In the 2001 calendar, everyone picks the same 2 or 3 images as their favorite - in this one it's way across the board. I don't know exactly what that says, but I like it. I also see that people were disappointed that the calendar was square this time and not the wide format of 2001. No one should blame Pocket for this - it was my decision, since I felt that the square format was better for the kinds of images we were showing (it's closer to the 35mm aspect ratio we usually see photographs in - rarely do you go to a photo gallery where all the pictures are widescreen). Happily, these people will be glad to know that the 2003 calendar does go back to the horizontal format. The scenic nature of the images will work better this way. It all depends on what works best for the pictures. For a calendar of Workbees, I would choose square. For the Galactica, it would have to be wide. The vast majority of people I've shown the calendar to seem to enjoy it, but I've read a lot of reviews online (especially at Amazon) from people who really hate it. While I want to please the audience this calendar is meant for, at the same time it's hard for me to give creedence to comments like 'the black and white picture would have been better in color' and 'the long exposure shot would have been better without the streaks.' It makes me a little sad that some folks won't allow themselves to view these things they love in a slightly different light. I'll go into more detail about the 2003 calendar and book in another message. Mojo [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3