The eye in the sky: Photos by Stephan Zirwes
July 19, 2011 1:27 PM   Subscribe

 
The photographer's website.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:29 PM on July 19, 2011


Greebles!
posted by joelf at 1:45 PM on July 19, 2011 [1 favorite]


Here's a Google search on the artist, which contains enough links to make this an interesting post. I was curious about the technique; these are shot straight down from not very high. This blog post about his technique says he does it "hundreds of meters above the ground with a climbing harness, hanging out of an open helicopter".

He's currently got a gallery show in Köln.
posted by Nelson at 1:54 PM on July 19, 2011


Ah, and here's a a photo of the artist taking photos. Big ass zoom lens, sitting in the door of a helicopter.
posted by Nelson at 1:55 PM on July 19, 2011


Is that a water tower in the middle of all that scaffolding? (picture "az5")
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 2:19 PM on July 19, 2011


[Warning: The photographer's website has auto sound]

I like this stuff quite a bit. Zirwes's framing seems to highlight, often that the ways in which humans design things (whether consciously or unconsciously) approach certain geometric configurations & designs, regardless of scale-- some of the industrial images look like microchips, for example. And, I suspect for that reason, there's a great deal of beauty in these photos, even when the subject is something typically considered 'ugly.' The human eye seems drawn to problematized order and clean geometries, and the brain seems to compensate by creating it even at levels beyond the scope of typical perception.
posted by shakespeherian at 2:22 PM on July 19, 2011 [2 favorites]


what shakespeherian said.

my version, whispered aloud: "holy fuck that is so goddamned beautiful."
posted by herbplarfegan at 2:37 PM on July 19, 2011


Stunning.
posted by ob at 4:40 PM on July 19, 2011


shakespeherian: "... and the brain seems to compensate by creating it even at levels beyond the scope of typical perception."

Yes, that's part of our evolution; the need to create patterns, connect the dots, recognise shapes.

It's why we lay on the grass as kids to see what clouds might resemble, and why we connect the stars.
posted by bwg at 4:57 PM on July 19, 2011 [1 favorite]


Zirwes's framing seems to highlight, often that the ways in which humans design things (whether consciously or unconsciously) approach certain geometric configurations & designs, regardless of scale...

What you're describing, the phenomenon of scale invariance, is a property of fractals. And it isn't just unique to human built structures. Many natural structures can be described as fractals, from the organization of DNA to river networks. Perhaps the fact that such a type of organization is reflected in biology, hydrology, and psychology suggests some kind of deeper meaning.
posted by euphorb at 6:18 PM on July 19, 2011 [1 favorite]


Perhaps the fact that such a type of organization is reflected in biology, hydrology, and psychology suggests some kind of deeper meaning.

Maybe, but the fact that it doesn't really hold at the extremes-- i.e. there are no medium-scale analogs to, for instance, the solar system, or a hydrogen atom, that I know of-- suggests an alternate explanation to me, which is that, within a certain scale range, the ways in which force organizes matter don't vary to any significant degree. Obviously that's not really true on a local level, but to see the self-similarity in the first place you usually have to "zoom out" somehow, so it seems to depend also on a given "zoom" ratio. I should disclaim that this is all thoroughly hand-wavey conjecture in a realm that I don't really know much about, so.
posted by invitapriore at 7:58 PM on July 19, 2011


This page has a short video -

I really like the ski race pictures.
posted by jaimystery at 3:37 AM on July 20, 2011 [1 favorite]


It's why we lay on the grass as kids to see what clouds might resemble, and why we connect the stars.

Also why, bwg, we cannot convince the majority of people that "correlation does not equal causation", that prejudice is wrong, and that a host of superstitions are meaningless.
posted by IAmBroom at 10:14 AM on July 20, 2011


shakespeherian: "... and the brain seems to compensate by creating it even at levels beyond the scope of typical perception."

Yes, that's part of our evolution; the need to create patterns, connect the dots, recognise shapes.

It's why we lay on the grass as kids to see what clouds might resemble, and why we connect the stars.


Also why, bwg, we cannot convince the majority of people that "correlation does not equal causation", that prejudice is wrong, and that a host of superstitions are meaningless.
posted by IAmBroom at 10:14 AM on July 20, 2011


« Older "Mrs. America, tell me how is your favorite son?"   |   Entartete Kunst Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments