Wrist photos

Here you can post stuff that is not related to Christopher Ward
kiter65
Trusted Seller
Trusted Seller
Posts: 3950
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:45 pm
CW-watches: 0

Wrist photos

Post by kiter65 »

Just posted a pic of my Airking on another thread, looking at the pic it looks massive on my wrist but looking at it in real life/in the mirror it looks just right/perfect fit. Why does it look so different in photos I post :?

Image
User avatar
missF
CW Forum Poet Laureate
CW Forum Poet Laureate
Posts: 11708
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:59 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Wrist photos

Post by missF »

kiter65 wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2023 6:33 pm Just posted a pic of my Airking on another thread, looking at the pic it is looks massive on my wrist but looking at it in real life/in the mirror it looks just right/perfect fit. Why does it look so different in photos I post :?

Image
It has to do with optics and the way cameras work. Someone will be along to explain properly I’m sure. I think it was @downer who explained it to me - I’ll try and find the thread :thumbup:
These users thanked the author missF for the post:
kiter65
User avatar
ajax87
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3396
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:47 am
CW-watches: 6
Location: West Michigan, USA

Re: Wrist photos

Post by ajax87 »

I believe I’ve heard the term parallax used to explain this before. Probably in some super science-y way!

Same here though. The watch seems to almost always look better on the wrist in real life than in the photo.
These users thanked the author ajax87 for the post:
kiter65
Alex
C5A Mk1|C65 316L LE|C63 36mm, GMT, Elite, 2023ish FLE|C1 Moonglow|Omega Seamaster DeVille|Speedmaster mk40|Speedmaster Racing|MoonSwatch Mercury|RZE Endeavor|Tudor BB58 925
User avatar
missF
CW Forum Poet Laureate
CW Forum Poet Laureate
Posts: 11708
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:59 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Wrist photos

Post by missF »

It has to do with how close to the lens the object is. Basically if you hold your wrist a distance from the camera you’ll get a better representation of the relative sizes of watch and wrist. On phone cameras now the quality is good enough to do that and then crop your image down.

Sorry I can’t find the thread that had a good explanation of this!
These users thanked the author missF for the post:
kiter65
kiter65
Trusted Seller
Trusted Seller
Posts: 3950
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:45 pm
CW-watches: 0

Re: Wrist photos

Post by kiter65 »

Looking at the dial face on/in the mirror there is at least a full link from the lugs each side before the bracelet wraps around the wrist, yet in the pics it looks as if the dail fills my wrist :?
User avatar
missF
CW Forum Poet Laureate
CW Forum Poet Laureate
Posts: 11708
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:59 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Wrist photos

Post by missF »

These users thanked the author missF for the post (total 2):
kiter65Stif
kiter65
Trusted Seller
Trusted Seller
Posts: 3950
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:45 pm
CW-watches: 0

Re: Wrist photos

Post by kiter65 »

missF wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2023 7:33 pm Here you go:

offtopic/wrist-shots-t49189.html?hilit=Wrist%20pic
Thanks Lindsey, can’t believe I posted a reply on that thread :oops:. One good thing about getting old, you can’t remember anything, it’s like every day is a school day, you learn new things all the time only to realise you knew that anyway :lol: :lol:
User avatar
missF
CW Forum Poet Laureate
CW Forum Poet Laureate
Posts: 11708
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:59 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Wrist photos

Post by missF »

@kiter65 - I don’t think there’s actually that much to know about watches. Just a handful of facts probably. And you and me have just spent 10 years relearning them on repeat :lol:
These users thanked the author missF for the post:
kiter65
User avatar
watchaholic
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:28 am
CW-watches: 4
Location: NE North Dakota, USA

Re: Wrist photos

Post by watchaholic »

That just goes to show the differences of perspective we all have. I tend to think the opposite. Looks great on the wrist, then I see it in a mirror and even a 42mm , depending on the watch of course, can look on the large side. That was the case when I recently tried on two different sizes of a Cartier Santos. Small and svelt was defiantly the better look in that case.
These users thanked the author watchaholic for the post (total 2):
kiter65tikkathree
Time and money? I’ve spent most of mine on booze and women. The rest I just wasted…
Dwight
User avatar
tikkathree
Trusted Seller
Trusted Seller
Posts: 7235
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:21 am
CW-watches: 1
Location: East Anglia - arr 'aas right buh

Re: Wrist photos

Post by tikkathree »

Does your phone cam have a zoom option or perhaps "close up" and "distant"? Try using the "distant" option and, as @missF suggests, cropping in.

Apart from the shift in perspective caused when the lens gets close to the subject (watch) and the processor thinks you want to go a bit fisheye what else, if anything, irks* you about typical wrist shots? I'm not a fan of the "clenched fist" look but my top ranking turn-off is the unintentional inclusion of bare feet.

*irk: my completely unplanned thought for the day is what an economic little word this is.
These users thanked the author tikkathree for the post:
kiter65
C60 MKI, MKII, MKIII: "some",
C6 & C60 Kingfishers,
C600 Tritechs,
C63 "some",
C65 "some",
C4, C40, C8, C9, C3, C5, C20FLE
Some other brands
User avatar
Amor Vincit Omnia
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 33617
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:34 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Wrist photos

Post by Amor Vincit Omnia »

Would we call it some kind of for shortening?
tikkathree wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2023 7:33 am …what else, if anything, irks* you about typical wrist shots? I'm not a fan of the "clenched fist" look but my top ranking turn-off is the unintentional inclusion of bare feet.
This is an interesting question. Before answering it I will plead completely guilty to most of the things I list below. However, I recognise this and I’m working on it. Because I often wear the same watch for a long period, I don’t feel the need to post a new “of the day” picture every day.

1. Huge expanses of bare arm. Guilty, very guilty. :oops: I usually wear short sleeved shirts and roll sleeves up. The best wrist shots to my mind often have 70% of the watch peeking out from under a smart cuff.

2. Car dashboards and/or food in the background. Guilty.

3. Feet. Guilty.

4. My pet hate is “of the day” shots, whether wrist or not, that were clearly not taken on the day. Especially when the same photograph is used multiple times within the thread. Just my view, but OF the day shots should be taken ON the day. Guilty (very occasionally in the past).

One of our little tasks as moderators is to look through all the threads to find suitable candidates for the Member Photo of the Month. Although we try to spread the accolade as widely as possible, it is very obvious that some people take better photos, whether those are technically or artistically better. Personally, I’m trying to look beyond wrist shots where possible (though I certainly wouldn’t discount a good one) to find photographs with interesting backgrounds, or an artistic element in the composition. Again, just me but I like to see a wider range of watches, and especially some of the older models.
These users thanked the author Amor Vincit Omnia for the post:
kiter65
Steve
Linguist; retired teacher; pilgrim; apprentice travel writer

Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints, kill nothing but time


Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit. (Max Ehrmann)
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post