<< Previous Next >>

minimalist ice art


minimalist ice art
Photo Information
Copyright: Bob Harrison (BobH) Silver Star Critiquer/Gold Note Writer [C: 40 W: 8 N: 192] (650)
Genre: Landscapes
Medium: Color
Date Taken: 2009-01-27
Camera: Canon PowerShot S5 IS
Exposure: f/3.5, 1/100 seconds
Details: Tripod: Yes
More Photo Info: [view]
Photo Version: Original Version
Date Submitted: 2009-03-02 5:59
Viewed: 6810
Points: 4
[Note Guidelines] Photographer's Note
Today's post is a striking contrast to yesterday's, "grandson of ice art 2". This arrangement of window frost occurred just two windows away, but is the polar opposite in complexity and aesthetics.

Like my earlier "minimalist grass art", nature has provided a scant and geometrically simple pattern. For reasons I don't understand, the frost formation was limited to straight lines, with very little non-linear branching. The image area is about 5 x 8 cm, so you can see that the more adventurous branches, such as at the bottom of the left side vertical track, never got more than a few mm long.

It almost seems that all the crystals in this view (other than the small aberrant island in the lower left center) might have grown from a single starting point. It would be interesting to set up a time lapse series sometime to capture the growth process. Did the lines start independently and grow through each other? Or do they all trace their origins back to one point? If so, which line started it? Irrespective of how they started, why was the growth only in straight lines?

This window is the one mentioned in the previous post, which was wiped clean and has not grown good frost crystals since. For several weeks, this window gave remarkably similar patterns every cold day. All were variants of this theme of intersecting straight lines, though some had many parallel vertical tracks with only a few intersecting tracks. At no point was there even a small hint of the florid complexity shown by the other window of the "ice art 2..." series.

Tech notes:
The camera position and settings were crucial to get the right background and render the details visible. The green is from a cedar tree 30 m away in my back yard. The lens to window distance was about 1 m, with maximum zoom (equivalent to 432 mm focal length for 35 mm format) and maximum aperture for minimum depth of field. A variety of shots in both macro and supermacro mode consistently left too much background detail visible, just close enough to being in focus that it was distracting. Anything in focus is on the inner surface of the window (i.e. the dirt that was later wiped off).

Post processing required much contrast addition and brightness adjustment, plus sharpening and cropping.


Only registered TrekNature members may rate photo notes.
Add Critique [Critiquing Guidelines] 
Only registered TrekNature members may write critiques.
Discussions
ThreadThread Starter Messages Updated
To tuslaw: straightnessBobH 1 03-02 15:26
You must be logged in to start a discussion.

Critiques [Translate]

  • Great 
  • tuslaw Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 2754 W: 282 N: 4931] (19883)
  • [2009-03-02 15:04]
  • [+]

Wow!! What a contrast from your last post Bob,
This is very interesting indeed, it almost makes me feel like I'm back in Geometry class.
Hard to believe that one moment you can get such an array of beautiful designs and the next time it turns out to be straight lines and angles. TFS.
Ron

amazingly beautiful! TFS Ori

Calibration Check
















0123456789ABCDEF