Atypical Point Of View Photography Assignment

  • Munro DD. Multiple active junctional naevi with family history of malignant melanoma. Proc R Soc Med. 1974 Jun. 67(7):594-5. [Medline].

  • Clark WH Jr, Reimer RR, Greene M, Ainsworth AM, Mastrangelo MJ. Origin of familial malignant melanomas from heritable melanocytic lesions. 'The B-K mole syndrome'. Arch Dermatol. 1978 May. 114(5):732-8. [Medline].

  • Clark WH Jr, Elder DE, Guerry D 4th, Epstein MN, Greene MH, Van Horn M. A study of tumor progression: the precursor lesions of superficial spreading and nodular melanoma. Hum Pathol. 1984 Dec. 15(12):1147-65. [Medline].

  • Duffy K, Grossman D. The dysplastic nevus: from historical perspective to management in the modern era: part I. Historical, histologic, and clinical aspects. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012 Jul. 67 (1):1.e1-16; quiz 17-8. [Medline].

  • Elder DE, Goldman LI, Goldman SC, Greene MH, Clark WH Jr. Dysplastic nevus syndrome: a phenotypic association of sporadic cutaneous melanoma. Cancer. 1980 Oct 15. 46(8):1787-94. [Medline].

  • Lynch HT, Frichot BC 3rd, Lynch JF. Familial atypical multiple mole-melanoma syndrome. J Med Genet. 1978 Oct. 15 (5):352-6. [Medline].

  • Reed RJ. A classification of melanocytic dysplasias and malignant melanomas. Am J Dermatopathol. 1984 Summer. 6 Suppl:195-206. [Medline].

  • Rhodes AR, Mihm MC Jr, Weinstock MA. Dysplastic melanocytic nevi: a reproducible histologic definition emphasizing cellular morphology. Mod Pathol. 1989 Jul. 2 (4):306-19. [Medline].

  • Ackerman AB. What naevus is dysplastic, a syndrome and the commonest precursor of malignant melanoma? A riddle and an answer. Histopathology. 1988 Sep. 13 (3):241-56. [Medline].

  • Annessi G, Cattaruzza MS, Abeni D, Baliva G, Laurenza M, Macchini V, et al. Correlation between clinical atypia and histologic dysplasia in acquired melanocytic nevi. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001 Jul. 45(1):77-85. [Medline].

  • Clemente C, Cochran AJ, Elder DE, Levene A, MacKie RM, Mihm MC, et al. Histopathologic diagnosis of dysplastic nevi: concordance among pathologists convened by the World Health Organization Melanoma Programme. Hum Pathol. 1991 Apr. 22(4):313-9. [Medline].

  • Klein LJ, Barr RJ. Histologic atypia in clinically benign nevi. A prospective study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1990 Feb. 22(2 Pt 1):275-82. [Medline].

  • Lebe B, Pabuççuoglu U, Ozer E. The significance of Ki-67 proliferative index and cyclin D1 expression of dysplastic nevi in the biologic spectrum of melanocytic lesions. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2007 Jun. 15(2):160-4. [Medline].

  • Massi D, Naldini A, Ardinghi C, Carraro F, Franchi A, Paglierani M, et al. Expression of protease-activated receptors 1 and 2 in melanocytic nevi and malignant melanoma. Hum Pathol. 2005 Jun. 36(6):676-85. [Medline].

  • Clarke LE. Dysplastic nevi. Clin Lab Med. 2011 Jun. 31(2):255-65. [Medline].

  • Reddy KK, Farber MJ, Bhawan J, Geronemus RG, Rogers GS. Atypical (dysplastic) nevi: outcomes of surgical excision and association with melanoma. JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Aug. 149(8):928-34. [Medline].

  • NIH Consensus Conference. Diagnosis and treatment of early melanoma. JAMA. 1992 Sep 9. 268(10):1314-9. [Medline].

  • Cannon-Albright LA, Goldgar DE, Meyer LJ, Lewis CM, Anderson DE, Fountain JW, et al. Assignment of a locus for familial melanoma, MLM, to chromosome 9p13-p22. Science. 1992 Nov 13. 258(5085):1148-52. [Medline].

  • Nobori T, Miura K, Wu DJ, Lois A, Takabayashi K, Carson DA. Deletions of the cyclin-dependent kinase-4 inhibitor gene in multiple human cancers. Nature. 1994 Apr 21. 368(6473):753-6. [Medline].

  • Bale SJ, Dracopoli NC, Tucker MA, Clark WH Jr, Fraser MC, Stanger BZ, et al. Mapping the gene for hereditary cutaneous malignant melanoma-dysplastic nevus to chromosome 1p. N Engl J Med. 1989 May 25. 320(21):1367-72. [Medline].

  • Celebi JT, Ward KM, Wanner M, Polsky D, Kopf AW. Evaluation of germline CDKN2A, ARF, CDK4, PTEN, and BRAF alterations in atypical mole syndrome. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2005 Jan. 30(1):68-70. [Medline].

  • Chaudru V, Laud K, Avril MF, Minière A, Chompret A, Bressac-de Paillerets B, et al. Melanocortin-1 receptor (MC1R) gene variants and dysplastic nevi modify penetrance of CDKN2A mutations in French melanoma-prone pedigrees. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 Oct. 14(10):2384-90. [Medline].

  • Celebi JT, Ward KM, Wanner M, Polsky D, Kopf AW. Evaluation of germline CDKN2A, ARF, CDK4, PTEN, and BRAF alterations in atypical mole syndrome. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2005 Jan. 30 (1):68-70. [Medline].

  • Uribe P, Wistuba II, Gonzalez S. Allelotyping, microsatellite instability, and BRAF mutation analyses in common and atypical melanocytic nevi and primary cutaneous melanomas. Am J Dermatopathol. 2009 Jun. 31(4):354-63. [Medline].

  • Melamed RD, Aydin IT, Rajan GS, Phelps R, Silvers DN, Emmett KJ, et al. Genomic Characterization of Dysplastic Nevi Unveils Implications for Diagnosis of Melanoma. J Invest Dermatol. 2017 Apr. 137 (4):905-909. [Medline].

  • [Guideline] IARC Working Group. Special Report: Policy A Review of human carcinogens- Part D: radiation. The Lancet. 2009/08. 10:751-752. [Full Text].

  • IARC Working Group. The association of use of sunbeds with cutaneous malignant melanoma and other skin cancers: a systematic review. Int J Cancer. 2006. 120:1116-22.

  • Tsao H, Sober AJ. Atypical melanocytic nevi. Freedburg IM, ed. Fitzpatrick's Dermatology in General Medicine. 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2003. Vol 1: 906-16.

  • Kraemer KH, Greene MH, Tarone R, Elder DE, Clark WH Jr, Guerry D 4th. Dysplastic naevi and cutaneous melanoma risk. Lancet. 1983 Nov 5. 2(8358):1076-7. [Medline].

  • Cooke KR et al. Dysplastic naevi in a population-based survey. Cancer. 1989. 63:1240.

  • Goldstein AM, Chan M, Harland M, et al. Features associated with germline CDKN2A mutations: a GenoMEL study of melanoma-prone families from three continents. J Med Genet. 2007 Feb. 44 (2):99-106. [Medline].

  • Banky JP, Kelly JW, English DR, Yeatman JM, Dowling JP. Incidence of new and changed nevi and melanomas detected using baseline images and dermoscopy in patients at high risk for melanoma. Arch Dermatol. 2005 Aug. 141(8):998-1006. [Medline].

  • Halpern AC, Guerry D 4th, Elder DE, Trock B, Synnestvedt M, Humphreys T. Natural history of dysplastic nevi. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1993 Jul. 29 (1):51-7. [Medline].

  • Salopek TG. The dilemma of the dysplastic nevus. Dermatol Clin. 2002 Oct. 20(4):617-28, viii. [Medline].

  • Bevona C, Goggins W, Quinn T, Fullerton J, Tsao H. Cutaneous melanomas associated with nevi. Arch Dermatol. 2003 Dec. 139(12):1620-4; discussion 1624. [Medline].

  • Geller AC, Swetter SM, Brooks K, Demierre MF, Yaroch AL. Screening, early detection, and trends for melanoma: current status (2000-2006) and future directions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007 Oct. 57(4):555-72; quiz 573-6. [Medline].

  • Silva JH, Sá BC, Avila AL, Landman G, Duprat Neto JP. Atypical mole syndrome and dysplastic nevi: identification of populations at risk for developing melanoma - review article. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011. 66(3):493-9. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  • Marinkovic M, Janjic Z, Nikolic J. Dysplastic nevus--a risk factor of developing skin melanoma clinical and epidemiological study with retrospective review of literature. Med Pregl. 2011 May-Jun. 64(5-6):315-8. [Medline].

  • Gandini S, Sera F, Cattaruzza MS, Pasquini P, Abeni D, Boyle P, et al. Meta-analysis of risk factors for cutaneous melanoma: I. Common and atypical naevi. Eur J Cancer. 2005 Jan. 41 (1):28-44. [Medline].

  • Kanzler MH, Swetter SM. Malignant melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 May. 48(5):780-3. [Medline].

  • de Snoo FA, Kroon MW, Bergman W, ter Huurne JE, Houwing-Duistermaat JJ, van Mourik L, et al. From sporadic atypical nevi to familial melanoma: risk analysis for melanoma in sporadic atypical nevus patients. J Am Acad Dermatol. May 2007. 56:748-52. [Medline].

  • Leachman SA, Carucci J, Kohlmann W, Banks KC, Asgari MM, Bergman W. Selection criteria for genetic assessment of patients with familial melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009 Oct. 61(4):677.e1-14. [Medline].

  • Singh AD, Damato B, Howard P, Harbour JW. Uveal melanoma: genetic aspects. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2005 Mar. 18(1):85-97, viii. [Medline].

  • Lynch HT, Fusaro RM, Lynch JF. Hereditary cancer syndrome diagnosis: molecular genetic clues and cancer control. Future Oncol. 2007 Apr. 3(2):169-81. [Medline].

  • Bronsnick T, Kazi N, Kirkorian AY, Rao BK. Outcomes of biopsies and excisions of dysplastic acral nevi: a study of 187 lesions. Dermatol Surg. 2014 Apr. 40(4):455-9. [Medline].

  • Roesch A, Burgdorf W, Stolz W, Landthaler M, Vogt T. Dermatoscopy of "dysplastic nevi": a beacon in diagnostic darkness. Eur J Dermatol. 2006 Sep-Oct. 16(5):479-93. [Medline].

  • Pellacani G, Farnetani F, Gonzalez S, Longo C, Cesinaro AM, Casari A, et al. In vivo confocal microscopy for detection and grading of dysplastic nevi: a pilot study. J Am Acad Dermatol. MAR/2012. 66:e109-21. [Medline].

  • Balu M, Kelly KM, Zachary CB, Harris RM, Krasieva TB, König K, et al. Distinguishing between benign and malignant melanocytic nevi by in vivo multiphoton microscopy. Cancer Res. 2014 May 15. 74 (10):2688-97. [Medline].

  • Babacan A, Lebe B. Grade of Atypia in Dysplastic Nevi and Relationship with Dermal Fibroplasia. Turk Patoloji Derg. 2012. 28(1):17-23. [Medline].

  • Campoli M, Fitzpatrick JE, High W, Ferrone S. HLA antigen expression in melanocytic lesions: Is acquisition of HLA antigen expression a biomarker of atypical (dysplastic) melanocytes?. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012 Jun. 66(6):911-916.e8. [Medline].

  • Farrahi F, Egbert BM, Swetter SM. Histologic similarities between lentigo maligna and dysplastic nevus: importance of clinicopathologic distinction. J Cutan Pathol. 2005 Jul. 32(6):405-12. [Medline].

  • Strazzula L, Vedak P, Hoang MP, Sober A, Tsao H, Kroshinsky D. The utility of re-excising mildly and moderately dysplastic nevi: A retrospective analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014 Dec. 71(6):1071-6. [Medline].

  • Mendese G, Maloney M, Bordeaux J. To scoop or not to scoop: the diagnostic and therapeutic utility of the scoop-shave biopsy for pigmented lesions. Dermatol Surg. 2014 Oct. 40(10):1077-83. [Medline].

  • Comfere NI, Chakraborty R, Peters MS. Margin comments in dermatopathology reports on dysplastic nevi influence re-excision rates. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013 Nov. 69(5):687-92. [Medline].

  • Reddy KK, Farber MJ, Bhawan J, Geronemus RG, Rogers GS. Atypical (dysplastic) nevi: outcomes of surgical excision and association with melanoma. JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Aug. 149(8):928-34. [Medline].

  • Duffy KL, Mann DJ, Petronic-Rosic V, Shea CR. Clinical decision making based on histopathologic grading and margin status of dysplastic nevi. Arch Dermatol. 2012 Feb. 148(2):259-60. [Medline].

  • Somani N, Martinka M, Crawford RI, Dutz JP, Rivers JK. Treatment of atypical nevi with imiquimod 5% cream. Arch Dermatol. 2007 Mar. 143(3):379-85. [Medline].

  • Francis SO, Mahlberg MJ, Johnson KR, Ming ME, Dellavalle RP. Melanoma chemoprevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006 Nov. 55(5):849-61. [Medline].

  • Tripp JM, Kopf AW, Marghoob AA, Bart RS. Management of dysplastic nevi: a survey of fellows of the American Academy of Dermatology. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002 May. 46(5):674-82. [Medline].

  • In relation to photography, ‘point of view’ refers to the position the camera is in when viewing a scene. Are you laying on the ground, looking up at your subject? Are you flying in a helicopter, looking down at the landscape below? Or are you simply standing and looking straight-on at your subject? Whether you’re looking up, down, or straight-on changes the scene dramatically, and changes the way that the viewer interprets the final photograph. Subjects can be dramatically distorted simply by where you place your camera. A blade of grass can look like a skyscraper, and a skyscraper can look like a tiny little house. It all depends on your point of view!

    While most of you probably take the majority of your photographs straight-on, it can be a good idea to start looking at subjects from different angles. While you probably don’t want to be known as “the photographer who always takes photos while lying down on the ground”, switching up your position every once in a while can lead to very interesting results.

    Bird’s-eye View

    When photographing a subject from above, it is known as a “bird’s-eye view”. This could be taken from up in the sky, such as when flying in a plane, or could simply be taken by standing on a ladder, slightly above your subject. Photographing from this point of view can make viewers feel as though they are superior to the subject – such as a stern father looking down on his misbehaving child – or protective over the subject. If the subject is an inanimate object, it can sometimes make the viewer feel as though there is a separation between them and the subject.

    Photographing from a bird’s-eye view can be especially effective if shooting landscapes from a helicopter (if you get so lucky). What seem as normal landscapes from the ground turn into beautiful, abstract works of art when seen from above.

    Photo by Flickr member moonjazz

    This beautiful photograph, taken above the Grand Canyon, is a stunning abstract mix of textures, patterns, and shades of red and brown. While any photograph of the Grand Canyon tends to be beautiful, seeing it from above puts it in a whole new perspective.

    Becoming the Subject

    This point of view tends to be the most effective, especially when photographing human subjects. To use this technique, photograph your subject from the point of view of the person interacting with the subject. For instance, if you were to take a shot of someone making dinner, take a photograph of the food as if you were the chef – perhaps even including hands in the foreground for reference. These sort of images make the viewer feel as though they are experiencing the scene themselves, and makes it easy to put themselves in the photographer’s place. An image from this point of view can be captivating, heartwarming, or even slightly disturbing depending on the subjects you decide to photograph.

    Photo by Flickr member KenyaBoy7

    The beautiful photograph above shows a newborn baby holding someone’s hand. When looking at this photograph, you can feel the love and compassion that the older person feels toward this new life. Looking at those tiny hands grasping the finger, you can almost imagine how it feels to be in that room with the baby. If this photograph was taken from any other perspective, the viewer wouldn’t feel as connected with the subjects in the image.

    Eye Level

    This is the most common way to photograph a subject. After all, it is typically the way we regard most subjects in our day to day lives, especially other people. While photographing humans from eye level is fairly common, what would happen if you photographed other subjects from eye level, such as an animal? While we interact with people on the same level every day, we hardly get face-to-face with a fox, or a bird, or a snake. Since we often don’t interact with these sort of subjects at eye level, photographing them from this perspective allows viewers to feel more connected with them – especially if the subject is making direct eye contact with the camera. It evokes a sense of familiarity and empathy, even with animals that we would be frightened to find ourselves face-to-face with in real life.

    Photo by Neil Taylor

    Take for instance this photograph of a fox. Many photographs we see of foxes are out in the wild, where the photographer is obviously trying to keep his/her distance from the subject. By getting up close and personal with this fox, you feel more connected with it and almost want to reach out and touch it. Instead of seeing a predator, getting on eye level with this animal makes it seem more like a cuddly, friendly pet.

    Worm’s-eye View

    Photographing from below is sometimes referred to as “worm’s-eye view”, as if you were a worm looking up at the world around you. As you can imagine, this makes all subjects look very large, even if they are very small in reality. As opposed to images shot from above, subjects presented in this way look as though they hold power over the viewer, and can seem very intimidating. By photographing a subject from a worm’s eye view, you automatically make the viewer feel vulnerable, even if the subject itself isn’t frightening.

    Photo by Mark Liebenberg

    In the photograph of the flower, you really feel as though you are laying on the ground, looking up at monstrous plants. So this is what it feels like to be a bug! Getting down on the ground allows you to see scenes that you wouldn’t ordinarily experience in your everyday life.

    If you’ve found yourself caught in the slump of always taking photographs from your own point of view, try to switch things up! Climb up on a ladder, lay down on the ground, or get eye-to-eye with subjects you don’t typically see from that angle. The possibilities are endless!

    0 comments

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *