On Anna Possberg Time Lapse article

[Deardorff]

Time lapse is nothing new. Try Walt Disneys movie THE LIVING DESERT from 1953. Done using time lapse work with film movie cameras. One frame at a time as the plants were doing their thing.

Newer gear makes it even more compelling but most of what is done now is relying on too much motion and gimmicks that screw up the visual message.

[Colorado David]

The easiest way (for me) to create a movie from a series of stills shot in interval mode is to import them into Adobe After Effects and choose for the import to create a sequence.  When you do that all the still images you've selected and imported will show up as a movie.  Then you can do whatever you want to the sequence, manipulate exposure, etc., or size the movie to your output dimensions and render it.

[Alan Smallbone]

Lots of movies have done timelapse, I remember Koyaanisqatsi - Life Out of Balance that used it extensively.

After Effects works great, another thing for a quick check on a timelapse and to play with different frame rates easily, is convert the images to jpg and use the GoPro movie studio, I do that to do a quick check, then will either use LR Timelapse or After Effects or sometimes both.

Alan

[Deardorff]

I think her work looks very good. Just took exception to the idea that this type of work is more recent. Tools now are better than ever but it still takes someone like her to push it for good results.

[Rhossydd]

Time lapse is nothing new.

To be fair she does says that. Although one key fact has been lost through a typing error; Georges Mèlies movie “Carrefour de L’Opera” was made in 1897 not 1987 as stated in the article.

It's a shame these articles aren't properly proof read and corrected.

[Deardorff]

To be fair she does says that. Although one key fact has been lost through a typing error; Georges Mèlies movie “Carrefour de L’Opera” was made in 1897 not 1987 as stated in the article.

It's a shame these articles aren't properly proof read and corrected.

Thanks for the clarification. Now I have more information which makes my comments moot.

[michael]

To be fair she does says that. Although one key fact has been lost through a typing error; Georges Mèlies movie “Carrefour de L’Opera” was made in 1897 not 1987 as stated in the article.

It's a shame these articles aren't properly proof read and corrected.

I agree. It really is inexcusable that we didn't put one of our numerous staff researchers and fact checkers to work to confirm that the date of the referenced movie in a contributor's article was correct.

This is the type of appalling inaccuracy that calls the entire veracity of this site into question.

Michael

[petermfiore]

I agree. It really is inexcusable that we didn't put one of our numerous staff researchers and fact checkers to work to confirm that the date of the referenced movie in a contributor's article was correct.

This is the type of appalling inaccuracy that calls the entire veracity of this site into question.

Michael

I second that!!! LOL

[Colorado David]

I agree. It really is inexcusable that we didn't put one of our numerous staff researchers and fact checkers to work to confirm that the date of the referenced movie in a contributor's article was correct.

This is the type of appalling inaccuracy that calls the entire veracity of this site into question.

Michael

Create a pool of Lula posters that keep a civil tongue (keyboard) and hold a lottery to assign proofreading duties.

[Rhossydd]

This is the type of appalling inaccuracy that calls the entire veracity of this site into question.

It's not just the factual typo, but all the grammatical errors too.
It's just a real shame that slowly what was once the best photo site on the net is declining.

Michael you set the bar high striving for excellence here, under the newer management things are slipping. Poorly written pieces with typos, photos of dubious merit placed on the front page to stimulate debate (visual trolling). Rather a shame.

[michael]

Ahh, so that's what this is about.

We're not just talking about the wrong date in a movie.

What we're talking about, apparently, is change. And most people don't like change. The reality though is that LuLa is changing and will continue to do so. Kevin has brought a fresh vision to the web site, whereas what I was doing was comfortable and familiar, but getting stale. Even I saw that.

Kevin has been in place at LuLa now for a year and I think that he's handling the transition amazingly well. Between the site itself, dealing with contributors, advertisers, and organizing and running workshops, this has always been a three person job. A labour of love as much as it is commerce. Kevin is one of the few people I've ever met with the energy and smarts needed to take it over, and I'm really pleased with how well he's doing it.

Are your criticisms valid? Sure, some of them. But to me the primary issue is that behind the scenes you have only seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to some very cool ideas that Kevin has for the future and ways to make the site more relevant and interesting.

Trust me... every hour spent proofreading articles (and we do spend a lot of time on it) is an hour that can't be devoted to dealing with site developers, talking to advertisers, working on workshop planning and customer relations, and also writing new articles. If we had a staff, that would be great. But we don't. One person does it all, and there are only so many hours in the day. You might prioritize your time differently, but you're not running the site, Kevin is.

So lighten up everyone. Kevin is not me and never will be. He's his own man, and makes his own mistakes. (I received my fair share (thousands) of complaints about my typos and spelling over the years).

Being an armchair critic is easy. So go ahead and criticize. That's your right. But I'll bet not one person in ten thousand here could do the job that Kevin's been doing as well and with as much knowledge, energy, joy and enthusiasm.

Michael

[Colorado David]

Personally I think Kevin has done a great job and has been a gentleman in the face of some serious remarks about his photographic vision.  A lot of people say things on discussion boards because they're insulated by the keyboard and Kevin has not responded in kind, but rather posted thoughtful responses.

[SanderKikkert]

Personally I enjoyed the article very much, wether Georges Meliés made that timelapse in 1897 (IMDB has it in 1898 by the way) or 1987, Thanks for posting Anna's article.
Best Regards, Sander

[Paulo Bizarro]

I agree. It really is inexcusable that we didn't put one of our numerous staff researchers and fact checkers to work to confirm that the date of the referenced movie in a contributor's article was correct.

This is the type of appalling inaccuracy that calls the entire veracity of this site into question.

Michael

Michael, I have frequented this site since about 2000 (I think...), so I have seen it evolve and develop. To be fair, this date mistake is quite easy to spot, and it is a big mistake...

I actually called attention to it in a thread I opened before this one:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=96757.0

Regards

[Anna Possberg]

As the author of the article in question I apologize for the typo error. It meant to be 1897 and of course not 1987. But I am relieved if that is the only big issue in this article as I think there are other topics written there that leave room for discussions. And please bear in mind that I am a non native speaker. So grammar errors or an unusual wording are not that obvious to me. Hopefully the meaning of the text counts more than the linguistic accuracy.
Thanks for Kevin and Michael for giving me an opportunity to share my humble experience on this absolutely fantastic site. Please, keep up the good work for the photographers out there.

Anna

[stamper]

Michael, I have frequented this site since about 2000 (I think...), so I have seen it evolve and develop. To be fair, this date mistake is quite easy to spot, and it is a big mistake...

I actually called attention to it in a thread I opened before this one:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=96757.0

Regards

It must be great to be perfect? Mentioned in two threads? Sounds more like a personal attack rather than a comment. A while back Michael stated he was losing patience with some members and might close the forum because of their attitude. Since then the sniping seems to have increased, Every day now I log onto the forum and find to my relief it is still there. IMO the best photographic forum I have seen and the only one I visit regularly. Unfortunately some seem to want it's demise. A few final warnings and barrings would be appropriate rather than closure???

[Troy Hamon]

Anna, Michael, and Kevin...keep up the good work and thank you.

[Kevin Raber]

The forum won't close.  It is too bad there is so much personal attacks.  Sometimes people find it easy to hide behind a keyboard and be rude.  I certainly have had a lot directed at me.  I am kind of thick skinned but my own personal manners I use everyday I carry forth onto this forum.  It's good to have an active forum and we try to let a lot of things go as someone can always ignore them. But, we may watch things a bit more closely. There are a lot of good contributors to LuLa and readers have to be more forgiving sometimes with typos and such.  Most contributors are photographers and not scholars and work very hard to produce an interesting essay or article to share.  That should be remembered when one comments. 

Once we open the new site we'll have something more to say on this topic.

Kevin