<<< o >>>little planet #3 22 comments + add yours

The previous two 'little planets' I put up were constructed from 360° panoramas, but this one used the following single shot:


When I was researching how to make these, one of the suggestions I came across (though can't find the url now) was that single photographs of islands can make good 'little planets'. So, I decided to look back through my Nassau shots to see if I'd shot any. I had, but I wasn't happy with how they turned out. Anyway, to cut a long story short, I definitely wanted to try using a single image so thought I'd try this one.

With a 360° panorama, the edges meet up as you wrap the image, but with a single shot they don't, so the major work that went into constructing this one was making sure that the joint wasn't too obvious.

focal length
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
image quality
RAW converter
5.50pm on 25/8/07
Canon 5D
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
aperture priority
C1 Pro
1x1 + people [portraiture] + digital art + little planets
comment by Georg Tavonius at 05:13 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

Well, I really like your pictures, but this is... how should I say this... strange? But everybody should try out new things if he wants to. :)
But please don't do that again with a single shot. ;-)

comment by Ash at 05:16 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

I have to agree with Georg. This one doesn't work for me at all, especially when compared to yesterday's fantastic shot. The DOF of the image also makes it a little strange. However, experimentation is always good.

comment by Pauline at 05:34 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

Hi Dave, I'm afraid I don't enjoy this picture either. Part of the problem for me is that I really disliked your series of photos with these two models so my first reaction was "Oh no, not these two again!" I am enjoying the planet series though and this might have worked for me without such a plastic looking posed twosome. I especially liked #2. I think the problem with the first for me was that the barren sand planet looked like a thumb end or something fleshy which you sorted out with #2. Thanks for sharing your work.

comment by kevin at 06:09 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

distorted buildings and landscapes are bearable. This is painful. Looking forward to your next post.

comment by djn1 at 06:17 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

kevin: I'm shooting a wedding tomorrow, so should have something a little less 'painful' to put up by tomorrow evening ;-)

comment by Alice at 07:44 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

Weird ... but I like it.

comment by bravelee at 08:08 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

i agree with georg, dont do it agin with single shot with human in it:)

comment by dfp at 08:33 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

No no no no... no. The original of this shot is great, but this just doesn't work for me. I do love the last 2 'little planets' though :)

comment by djn1 at 08:57 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

And I was going to do my next tutorial on "little planet portraiture". I guess I'll have to rethink that one then ;-)

comment by marcus at 09:20 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

that is the worst I have seen from you.. why why........

comment by Jennifer at 09:33 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

You have been having Photoshop fun while I've been on hols! Love the pylons and the planets - not too sure about this one though.

comment by inna at 11:55 PM (GMT) on 26 October, 2007

yikes! seeing this one almost takes away from the beautiful planet manipulations from the past few days. those seemed mysterious and perfectly crafted; this just seems slightly tacky and unsightly...

comment by g at 12:10 AM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

Someone is bored. :)

comment by m at 12:11 AM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

Hhhhhhmmmmmm. Odd!

comment by lisa at 12:44 AM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

Definitely agreeing on this one... not a fan at all... but you don't see the joint, so... mission accomplished? hehe.

comment by Goshinga at 01:48 AM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

Comical, really.


comment by Mayuresh Patil at 04:07 AM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

Hello David,

Criticism kept aside. Would you mind explaining why you decided to go with this post? I know it is strictly experimental but besides being diplomatic with your response to the criticism, how would you defend this shot?

You are the number one reason and a pure source of inspiration for someone like me to have a photoblog and there might be hundreds of others who are inspired by you.

With all respect,

comment by csj at 10:33 AM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

Stick to your guns, without your far reaching technical and experimental view towards imagery, we'd have a pretty stagnant view of image making. Doing something, semi-controversial like this makes people think and comment, and realise that doing this is a difficult task.

Whilst this isnt my favourite image ever, it evoked a reaction, which is positive, and negative, which gives a "rounded" debate. ;-) - csj @ id7.co.uk

comment by David Chabashvili at 01:05 PM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

It is odd, but very interesting experiment. I don't look at this work as a photo, but rather as an experimenting with different means to make photos interesting. This might be a very good start of incorporating people into 'planet' shots. Would love to see if something interesting comes up in this direction.

comment by djn1 at 10:11 PM (GMT) on 27 October, 2007

Craig/David: thanks for a spirited defence, but I think I'll spend a bit more time exploring the people/planet idea before I post another one ;-)

comment by Richard Trim at 05:51 PM (GMT) on 29 October, 2007

Don't let these two see this Dave... The previous two images are intriguing with the height of buildings helping loads. Wouldn't work quite so well with a field full of holiday caravans ha! richard ;-)

comment by HughC at 10:13 PM (GMT) on 6 August, 2008

Love this technique but I don' usually have as much success with polars with people in 'em as you do ... URL