Would the image/picture of a mountain appear as vast in the head if I had never seen a mountain/sky before?
Aren't the dimensions of the image in the picture different from the ones formed in the head? Can a picture of Taj Mahal justify its appearance in reality?
- thecanadianoneLv 79 years agoFavorite Answer
The impact of a photograph mainly depends upon the inclusion of things we know about already - for comparison to the unknowns in the picture. For example, we know how tall average people of normal stature and proportion are, so if we see a photo with a normal-looking adult person standing beside a tree, we can easily see the dimensions of the tree!! Color also counts: if a red rose is included in a photo, we can judge other colors from it, even if the color balance is off, since we know what color a "standard" red rose is!! A picture of something without the inclusion of anything for scale or comparison, can look pretty strange: take a photo of a grain of sand, very highly magnified, for example - in complete isolation, perhaps on a mirror: the effect is very strange, and the mind doesn't know what to make of it! BUT, put an ant beside it and everything falls into place immediately because you already knows what an ant looks like!! SO, a photo of the Taj Mahal, with a bunch of tourists and bushes and such visible in the picture, will show the viewer what it really looks like, because there are things in it for comparison.
To get to your question: a photo of a mountain will look as vast as it truly is, IF and only if it contains things which the mind can compare it to: for example, a highway which goes past or partly up the mountain, on which we can make out specks we know are cars. Trees in the picture, starting out in the foreground and going all the way to the mountain, would also help - or a cable car construction. If, however, there is little in the photo to give the mind clues as to the true dimensions of the mountain, then the mind of the viewer will not be able to get a true idea of how vast it is, and as a consequence, may over- or under-estimate its dimensions.
Hope this helps!! Its late at night so i am not thinking really clearly, to explain things as sharply as i might at this time in the day!!
- duckworthLv 43 years ago
I stay in Wisconsin i've got considered the Appalachians. i flow to work out the Rockies this summer time. It particularly stunned me that plenty land isn't efficient. the place I stay right here in Wisconsin, almost each and every sq. foot of land that's not homes, roads, or decrease than water is a field starting to be some thing.