[at-l] Maine Wind Farms

[jbullar1 at twcny.rr.com (Jim Bullard)]

Well, if you really want a explanation here goes:

Hold your arm (either arm) out at full length, spread your fingers fully 
and focus your attention on your thumbnail. The, without shifting your 
attention from your thumbnail, tell me if you are seeing your little finger 
sharply. I don't need to wait for a reply to know the answer is "NO!".

Our eye sees about a 3? angle sharply. Everything else in your peripheral 
vision is fuzzy. We think we see everything sharply because our eyes are 
constantly darting from one thing to another and our brain remembers the 
momentary images just like a TV screen 'remembers' the color of each dot on 
the screen until the moving beam hits it again.

Unlike the TV though we are seeing constant, albeit out of focus, light all 
across our field of vision all the time. If something in that field catches 
our attention, our eye will immediately go to that. Our attention can be 
caught by either a bright (and/or out of place) color, a bright object or 
by movement, such as spinning blades of a windmill with flashing lights 
bright enough to warn aircraft.

In other words what is relatively unobtrusive in a static simulation, will 
not be unobtrusive when in motion with flashing lights. That will be 
especially true at dawn or dusk when the scenery is most attractive to 
artistic folks like me. To be blunt, when in motion with flashing lights 
these things will stick out from the landscape like sore thumbs. Your eye 
will be drawn to the towers like iron to a magnet. It's a throwback to our 
primitive survival instincts. We need to be aware of things that might be a 
threat so our brain makes us pay attention to such things over more subtle 
non-potentially threatening things, like calm scenery.

Someone with animation skills (not me unfortunately) could represent the 
actual impression these will make far more accurately than any still photo. 
To give people you were surveying a more accurate idea you would need 
multiple animations showing the windmills in motion with the lights and 
under a variety of light (time of day) and weather conditions. I've seen 
the still photo comparisons. They make the towers appear relatively 
innocuous and they do not represent what you would actually 'see'.

Then of course we are left with the question, what sort of hikers did they 
survey?

At 03:46 PM 12/28/2005 -0500, Bob C wrote:
>Jim: Your views are right on. Unfortunately, 80% of hikers when shown the 
>photo simulations created by the developer said they wouldn't be bothered 
>by the wind turbines and towers on Redington, if the simulations 
>illustrate what the towers would look like. I need an argument that 
>refutes that hiker opinion, i.e. that even accurate photo simulations are 
>inherently inaccurate in evaluating the scenic impacts of a development, 
>because the human eye sees things that a camera lens does not, except when 
>the lens is controlled by a skilled photographer.
>
>Weary
>
> > ------------Original Message------------
> > From: Jim Bullard <jbullar1@twcny.rr.com>
> > To: "Bob C" <ellen@clinic.net>, AT-L@Backcountry.net
> > Date: Wed, Dec-28-2005 3:28 PM
> > Subject: Re: [at-l] Maine Wind Farms
> >
> > At 11:18 AM 12/28/2005 -0500, Bob C wrote:
> > >Comments by the many skilled photographers on AT-L are welcome. Please
> >
> > >offer any help you can about how best to word and document this
> > message.
> >
> > Well you could start by noting that the term "scenic" implies natural
> > views, not industrial structures. Are these people who will be moved by
> >
> > aesthetic arguments? I doubt it. Their eye's are too clouded by $$$$ to
> > see
> > beyond the potential profits. I certainly would not be inclined to go
> > take
> > pictures of wind towers and if I want to shoot photos of spinning
> > flashing
> > lights, a carnival would be a better location. All this will do is
> > spoil
> > the natural view.
> >
> > In one of his books on nature photography, the internationally famous
> > photographer Galen Rowell commented on the explosion of power lines,
> > etc.
> > in recent years. He showed 2 views of a very remote mountain scene that
> > he
> > had shot a few years apart. The later view had a line of electric or
> > phone
> > poles running right through it. Sad. Really sad. I can't tell you how
> > many
> > times I have found a great view but either didn't take the picture or
> > had
> > to clone out objectionable man-made objects (mostly power lines/cell
> > towers) because they spoiled the scene.
> >
> > What makes it doubly sad is that they could just as easily build them
> > where
> > there was not a scenic view that rates as a National Treasure.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AT-L Mailing List.
> >
> > Go here to unsubscribe or change your options:
> >
> > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
> >
> >