Removal of Main Street Christmas Wreaths Due to New Parade

[photomatt]

This clip is from the local news tonight.

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/27322273/how-disney-transforms-magic-kingdom-for-the-holidays

They specifically mention that the new wreaths improve sight lines. In the past, I think they took down the flag pole just a day or two before they installed the tree. Now, the pole has been moved weeks in advance of the tree's arrival, and there is nothing blocking the view of Main Street and the castle. After seeing the view in person, I like the changes - a lot.

Just wait until someone with a decent camera, lens, and knowledge of HDR goes to the second level of the train station and takes a shot looking down Main street. I'm pretty sure you will be amazed.

I have to admit that during the daytime the arches above the wreaths do look a little odd, but at night you don't notice it at all (or not as much). I would be willing to guess that the size of the arches is related to structural issues that trumped design issues. I don't know that as a fact; it's just a guess.

 

[PhotoDave219]

This clip is from the local news tonight.

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/27322273/how-disney-transforms-magic-kingdom-for-the-holidays

They specifically mention that the new wreaths improve sight lines. In the past, I think they took down the flag pole just a day or two before they installed the tree. Now, the pole has been moved weeks in advance of the tree's arrival, and there is nothing blocking the view of Main Street and the castle. After seeing the view in person, I like the changes - a lot.

Just wait until someone with a decent camera, lens, and knowledge of HDR goes to the second level of the train station and takes a shot looking down Main street. I'm pretty sure you will be amazed.

I have to admit that during the daytime the arches above the wreaths do look a little odd, but at night you don't notice it at all (or not as much). I would be willing to guess that the size of the arches is related to structural issues that trumped design issues. I don't know that as a fact; it's just a guess.

I already have but I'm not one of those HDR monkeys.

 

[mikenatcity1]

I'm not one for the Train Station view...I'm for the Main Street, flag pole view...from what I saw, it looks beautiful at night seeing the end of the video makes it look a lot different- castle and lights...can't wait to see it next month

 

[Brad Bishop]

From remembering past years with the wreaths across Main St and seeing the pictures here (I'll be there next week so will be able to check them out in person):

The wreaths/garland strung across Main St. do give it a cozy feel. They also block the view of the castle. Every time I'd go during Christmas I'd be excited to see the decorations and the garland/wreaths and then I'd have the realization: Oh, that's right.. You can't see the castle with this.

LED lighting: I like it going forward, but they need brighter LED lights in the decorations. It's great in that they use less energy and give off almost no heat but in use at WDW they have a muted look to them. I think it's because they take the LED and then put it in a larger plastic "bulb" and that really cuts down on the light emitted. They do that to mimic the old C7/C9s but I think it'd look a lot better to just have naked LEDs up there giving off their full light.

New wreaths hanging off buildings: I really love how you get the full view of the castle. This is coming from a guy who used to love the garland going across the main streets of my home town and even the string of lights which would sometimes be used across the streets instead of garland. With all of that being said, the main streets of the towns I'm thinking of didn't have an awesome castle at the end of the street and I think it looks better without the garland.

The wreaths hanging off the sides of the buildings look odd. I think there are a few things happening with it:
- It's new and different and thus, it's going to stand out in our minds.
- The brackets are too long / big. It seems like if they were about half the length, which would mean dumping the bells at the end, then it'd seem less obtrusive and look a lot better.
- I think this one is the big one: If you really think about it, hanging wreaths like that doesn't make sense. If you were a shop owner at turn-of-the-century Main St. USA, you may hang a wreath on a door or a window or maybe even high up on your building if you had a large flat spot. You wouldn't build some contraption to hang it out into the street like a fishing pole, though. Normally, the wreath would just be flat up against something. As others have mentioned, you definitely would do something like this in a mall where you were trying to hang wreaths out and you basically had a ceiling and large poles to work with. Even then, I think you'd just build a hanger long enough for a wreath and wouldn't build it 2x as long just so you could change a few bells off the ends. I don't think the bells add much for the cost of it looking more obtrusive.

I think it was a good thing to keep the FoF parade going. It really is a great daytime parade and I'm not a big fan of parades (I basically like MSEP and FoF parade - the rest I just pass by). I think that this is one of those things where they would have been best to just forgo the garland and maybe add a few things to the overall decorations but not try to replace it with the wreaths and large hangers. People would have complained that the garland went away and they didn't replace it, anyway, but people are going to complain no matter what. I think that the overall look would have been better, though.

 

[ABQ]

Just wait until someone with a decent camera, lens, and knowledge of HDR goes to the second level of the train station and takes a shot looking down Main street. I'm pretty sure you will be amazed.

I already have but I'm not one of those HDR monkeys.

I was going to say, a knowledge of HDR is one thing, but when that power is used for evil, it's just so annoying. Too many cartoonish looking pictures everywhere these days. I'm sure that view is awesome at night, I hope to see a well taken shot.

I'm sure Matt's referring to a good picture though, not an "Oh golly gee, I found the HDR feature on my iphone or took 900 bracketed photos and used this fancy widget to make evening look like high noon." Again, not taking a shot at you @photomatt , but a big shot at the billions of badly taken HDR's out there.

 

[Brad Bishop]

I agree about HDR.

To me the rule is: I shouldn't look at an HDR picture and immediately think, "Oh, that's HDR." It can be used to enhance a scene and used really well in that respect so you can see some things in the shadows but not have your bright spots blown out. If it's a good HDR picture then HDR doesn't enter my mind and I only may, as a secondary thought, think, "I wonder if that's HDR..."

Often it's used as, "Snap the three shots in HDR. Let some software auto-combine them. Maybe add auto-processing or maybe just roll with it. Don't do anything else. Look at those colors pop!" (and it's cartoonish)

 

[mp2bill]

I like it! Splitting up the wreaths frees up views of the castle.

 

[afb28]

I agree about HDR.

To me the rule is: I shouldn't look at an HDR picture and immediately think, "Oh, that's HDR." It can be used to enhance a scene and used really well in that respect so you can see some things in the shadows but not have your bright spots blown out. If it's a good HDR picture then HDR doesn't enter my mind and I only may, as a secondary thought, think, "I wonder if that's HDR..."

Often it's used as, "Snap the three shots in HDR. Let some software auto-combine them. Maybe add auto-processing or maybe just roll with it. Don't do anything else. Look at those colors pop!" (and it's cartoonish)

That's why most people nowadays use the term bracketed or multi-exposure shot. Using "HDR" has a bad rep because of the "clown barf" HDR.

99.9% of my night shots are bracketed shots, typically 3 or 5 exposures. And I plan on going there in the next week or so to get some hopefully empty Main St shots with the new decor.

 

[janoimagine]

I already have but I'm not one of those HDR monkeys.

If you know how to properly expose a shot you don't need a 5 stop bracket to make it look great.

HDR is one of the most over used 'effects' in the digital world ... that and tone mapping.

 

[afb28]

If you know how to properly expose a shot you don't need a 5 stop bracket to make it look great.

HDR is one of the most over used 'effects' in the digital world ... that and tone mapping.

For night shots this is pretty inaccurate. In fact it's just completely inaccurate.

Daytime it depends on the how much highlights/shadows can be recovered. If you're shot has some serious shadows and you can't recover them, then you should use another exposure to make sure you have it if you need it later.

 

[janoimagine]

For night shots this is pretty inaccurate. In fact it's just completely inaccurate.

Daytime it depends on the how much highlights/shadows can be recovered. If you're shot has some serious shadows and you can't recover them, then you should use another exposure to make sure you have it if you need it later.

No its not ... you can take a great night capture without bracketing.

Trust me, I know what I am talking about.

 

[afb28]

No its not ... you can take a great night capture without bracketing.

Trust me, I know what I am talking about.

You definitely can as I never take my camera out of Manual and get a great center exposed shot.

But take Main St shots for instance. It is super hard to get those street lights/highlights reduced enough to make it a cleaner and not as glowy image. So when you have those multiple exposures, you have the ability to reduce them further than with a single shot.

Also, almost every single main st shot, I always end up masking in the clock from Cinderella's Castle because it is always blown out regardless of how much I can recover. So going down 2 or even 3 stops will get that clock exposed so I can use it later.

I am 1,000% on board with how awful clown barf HDR is though.

 

[janoimagine]

You definitely can as I never take my camera out of Manual and get a great center exposed shot.

But take Main St shots for instance. It is super hard to get those street lights/highlights reduced enough to make it a cleaner and not as glowy image. So when you have those multiple exposures, you have the ability to reduce them further than with a single shot.

Also, almost every single main st shot, I always end up masking in the clock from Cinderella's Castle because it is always blown out regardless of how much I can recover. So going down 2 or even 3 stops will get that clock exposed so I can use it later.

I am 1,000% on board with how awful clown barf HDR is though.

Bracketing a capture has its advantages and can help you when your moving quickly or shooting from the hip, I understand it usefulness, and it has saved me at times ... but you also run into the problem of storage and editing after the fact.

That being said, I would rather take 1 solid raw capture from my MarkIII (or a D800 or even a P65) and process it into a great shot, than try and take a bracketed shot and piece something together because I wasn't paying attention to my settings.

I produce and work as a digital tech for a lot of big shooters, their is nothing I hate more than a lazy photographer who takes 15+ shots and tries to have me piece them together into one polished comp, when we could have done the same thing in 3 shots if he/she had just paid attention to their lighting and didn't try to do everything piecemeal.

I think the record goes to a german car shooter I was producing a Camaro studio job for ... he had 3 digital techs working for him ... when the final file was turned over to the client it had 74 layers and was a whopping 9GB.

 

[afb28]

Bracketing a capture has its advantages and can help you when your moving quickly or shooting from the hip, I understand it usefulness, and it has saved me at times ... but you also run into the problem of storage and editing after the fact.

That being said, I would rather take 1 solid raw capture from my MarkIII (or a D800 or even a P65) and process it into a great shot, than try and take a bracketed shot and piece something together because I wasn't paying attention to my settings.

I produce and work as a digital tech for a lot of big shooters, their is nothing I hate more than a lazy photographer who takes 15+ shots and tries to have me piece them together into one polished comp, when we could have done the same thing in 3 shots if he/she had just paid attention to their lighting and didn't try to do everything piecemeal.

I think the record goes to a german car shooter I was producing a Camaro studio job for ... he had 3 digital techs working for him ... when the final file was turned over to the client it had 74 layers and was a whopping 9GB.

Yeah that is just craziness.

I do it just in case that center exposed shot isn't able to recover what it needs to.

What you're talking about though reminds me of this



I don't have time for stuff like that.

 

[rct247]

I saw the new wreaths in person for the first time today and they actually look much better in person. The scale looks off when you are viewing from the train station or at the end of the streets, but when you are walking down the street they look like they fit very well. So I retract of my negative comments. They will still have to grow on me. I still prefer the old style, but this is a good alternative.

 

[StageFrenzy]

I already have but I'm not one of those HDR monkeys.

I know you're not @WDWFigment willing to show your goods to every fanboi and gurl. But I wouldn't mind getting a peek at your Main Street.

 

[John]

Bracketing a capture has its advantages and can help you when your moving quickly or shooting from the hip, I understand it usefulness, and it has saved me at times ... but you also run into the problem of storage and editing after the fact.

That being said, I would rather take 1 solid raw capture from my MarkIII (or a D800 or even a P65) and process it into a great shot, than try and take a bracketed shot and piece something together because I wasn't paying attention to my settings.

I produce and work as a digital tech for a lot of big shooters, their is nothing I hate more than a lazy photographer who takes 15+ shots and tries to have me piece them together into one polished comp, when we could have done the same thing in 3 shots if he/she had just paid attention to their lighting and didn't try to do everything piecemeal.

I think the record goes to a german car shooter I was producing a Camaro studio job for ... he had 3 digital techs working for him ... when the final file was turned over to the client it had 74 layers and was a whopping 9GB.

To me that's not photography....its nothing more then a CGI

 

[janoimagine]

To me that's not photography....its nothing more then a CGI

Your exactly right ... and in reality CGI would have been cheaper for them. In the automotive world CGI is rapidly replacing photography.

 

[afb28]

nm

 

[Cody5294]

Have they put up the Christmas trees at the parks other than the MK