Scale? Photo | TrekEarth

Photographer’s Note

I'm curious about people's thoughts on including people or objects for scale. I've posted some shots without any reference for scale and received comments that I should include them; then I've posted other shots with people to show scale, and received comments that the shots would look nicer without the people. I suppose it's a matter of personal preference, but I'm curious about views on the subject. Personally, I like shots like this one where you have no idea about the scale . . . but that's just me.

This is a glacier inside the wall of the crater on Mt. Mutnovsky. For those of you who like scale, if I remember correctly, the front part of glacier was at least two or three times as tall as I am.

Ebbe, Rockyboy, CVTJan, liakos, hojper, ken74, Wokini has marked this note useful

Critiques | Translate

Ebbe (9571) 2004-03-19 13:45

Only two or three times, so you are about 21 feet tall scaling you by my view of the glacier. But I like the picture, the diagonals both in cracks and layers of gravels together with the tight crop make it strong.

Rockyboy (20582) 2004-03-19 18:34

In my personal opinion, i think it would be better to put someone walking in front but if it is 2 or 3 times as tall as you, it would be dangerous for him...) Anyway, a very good picture of Kamchatka. Bravo!

mdchachi (1611) 2004-03-20 23:29 [Comment]

Show Comment

hojper (2830) 2004-03-23 2:45

Well, as photography is also about mindtricks, I think it's OK to let the viewer work out the scale himself. True, this could also be a macro shot of tiretracks in the ground, but if one looks closely enough it's not. On the other hand if one has never seen a glacier, it might be difficult to judge the real size. Finally, there are pros and cons. I'd let the situation and the composition decide.

ken74 (76) 2005-03-03 14:10