Go Back   PhotographyCorner.com Forums > Photo Sharing Corner > Places

Welcome to the PhotographyCorner.com Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, photographs and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), vote on contests like the Photograph of the Month and Contest Corner Challenges, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support.

Archive Suite top banner
View Poll Results: This picture...
Is a keeper 11 73.33%
Isn't a keeper 2 13.33%
Isn't a picture because it's a photoshop. 2 13.33%
You may not vote on this poll



Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31    Top
Old February 9th, 2005, 04:51 AM
leptokurtotic's Avatar
leptokurtotic leptokurtotic is offline
Some Guy
Bronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reason
Some edits: to correct typos.

Quote:
I frankly am just not a fan of heavily manipulated images as seen on the link you posted.
I can't make you be a fan of photomontage if it's just not what your into. Kind of like how nobody is going to convince me to be interested in straight-up pictures of buildings. Then again, I don't insist that pictures of buildings are really just copies of other people's art and thus are always bad photos (though some do).

Quote:
I will say that toning and sharpening and all that darkroom stuff you do, it's still a photograph. You can manipulate in camera as well with ISOs, fish-eye distortion, shutter lag, etc.
I understand that people agree with you on this, but I have no idea why you beleive in these rules for manipulation. Fisheye really gets me-- why is photomerge + spherize not allowed but lenses with 180+ degree field of view perfectly OK? Besides, this image wouldn't be hard to create in a darkroom.


Quote:
I don't care about the maniuplation part call it photography, call it whatever you want,
You're such a polite gentleman.
__________________
f(x)=1/[(pi)*(1+x^2)]
  #32    Top
Old February 9th, 2005, 05:47 AM
kixphotography's Avatar
kixphotography kixphotography is offline
Premiere Member
Contributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonSilver Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 2,000 posts. - Issue reasonBronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reason
I can't say your response made much sense. Partly because it was unnecessary I suppose. I did not say those were the rules for manipulation. In my opinion you can do as little or as much as you like. I just named a few common ones that are often done by computer automatically at any photo lab you go to. Not saying those are limited, just attempting to point out they are manipulations.

I used fish eye lens as an illustration of manipulation. One response talked about it should be limited to the camera, this is what I was referring to. To elaborate more on that, think of all the filters and everything you can put on your lens to make the image different than what it appears to your eye.
Because you do these changes prior to your processing it makes it maintain it's definition as a photograph? I do not understand the person's views on that and will have to disagree. If you're getting the same effect before you process or after, it's still the same effect.

As far as heavily manipulated images go (my definition of the term would be combining photos to create an unrealistic image) such as what you've posted and what the person whose website link you posted, I personally don't care for them. In my opinion if you're going to combine images, make it beleiveable. Not saying anything about them isn't good or anything else. Just not what I care to view...I also don't like Macro photography.

I hope this clears things up. Basically I'm agreeing with you on most of your points here.
__________________
http://pbandjphotography.com
  #33    Top
Old February 9th, 2005, 06:14 AM
leptokurtotic's Avatar
leptokurtotic leptokurtotic is offline
Some Guy
Bronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reason
Quote:
I used fish eye lens as an illustration of manipulation.
In that case we agree about that. It didn't seem clear at first.


Quote:
If you're getting the same effect before you process or after, it's still the same effect.
Right, OK. So it's not that you think that it's some kind of out-of-bounds kind of image.

Quote:
Not saying anything about them isn't good or anything else. Just not what I care to view...I also don't like Macro photography.
Fair comment, I guess.
__________________
f(x)=1/[(pi)*(1+x^2)]
  #34    Top
Old February 9th, 2005, 07:43 AM
Louis's Avatar
Louis Louis is offline
Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by leptokurtotic
Thank you very much to everyone for their approving comments. I should add this to my signature, but criticism of any photo I post in any forum is always welcome, should you feel like offering some.

That said: somebody almost immediately voted for the "that's not a picture it's a photoshop" option.

I think that this is an understandable claim, but that it is ultimately misguided. Because photography is an image making technology, all images primarily created using a camera should be considered pictures just as much as images processed using Photoshop. Here are some arguments in support of my view.
I don't read it all, but i would say i agree with you on considering not a sacrilege to modify a photo.. on the other hand there are lens and filters that can be applied before taking the shot.. if think this is an alternative way of using PS..

BUT

I think that's not "photography" itself..
iit should be called "digital art".. do you agree?

Anyway: great house i want it!!
__________________
Intel Core i7 920 - MB Asus P6T - 6 GB DDR3 Corsair - Radeon HD 4850 512 MB - Windows Vista SP2 64-bit & Linux 64-bit
Sponsors
  #35    Top
Old February 9th, 2005, 05:15 PM
kixphotography's Avatar
kixphotography kixphotography is offline
Premiere Member
Contributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonSilver Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 2,000 posts. - Issue reasonBronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reason
louis, precisely.

Quote:
Right, OK. So it's not that you think that it's some kind of out-of-bounds kind of image.
Not so sure I understand what you mean on that one. Oh well.
__________________
http://pbandjphotography.com
  #36    Top
Old February 10th, 2005, 02:54 AM
leptokurtotic's Avatar
leptokurtotic leptokurtotic is offline
Some Guy
Bronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reason
Quote:
I think that's not "photography" itself..
iit should be called "digital art".. do you agree?
That can't be right, as guys do the same thing with enlargers. Like Scott Mutter.

Quote:
Not so sure I understand what you mean on that one
Some people think that any distortion achieved "mechanically" is acceptable, even if the same thing achieved digitally is too much adjustment. This is an almost superstitious way of thinking about photography, and I think that it is kind of silly.
__________________
f(x)=1/[(pi)*(1+x^2)]
  #37    Top
Old February 13th, 2005, 10:39 AM
midnitejam midnitejam is offline
Junior VIP Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Wilson
I have a simple rule if it can be done in camera or in a traditional darkroom then it's ok.
Most people have no clue as to the stuff that can be accomplished in a darkroom. Darkroom science goes far beyond burn and dodge.
__________________
Midnitejam-

My Photos Are OK to Edit--Please, show me how the pros do it.
  #38    Top
Old February 13th, 2005, 11:41 AM
midnitejam midnitejam is offline
Junior VIP Member
leptokurtotic wroteÖ
Quote:
Agreed again. I guess that what bothers me is the idea that montage techniques that have long been available in the darkroom for people with money and space are suddenly off-limits because you can use photoshop to produce similar images easily and cheaply. And I find the notion that doing montage with an enlarger rather than digitally is somehow morally superior frankly absurd.
I absolutely agree with you, leptokurtotic


leptokurtotic wroteÖ
Quote:
Some people think that any distortion achieved "mechanically" is acceptable, even if the same thing achieved digitally is too much adjustment. This is an almost superstitious way of thinking about photography, and I think that it is kind of silly.
Again I absolutely agree. In fact, I absolutely and unconditionally agree with everything leptokurtotic has expressed in this thread.

A puristí frame of mind is more appropriate in the police department where accurate documentation and careful recordings of the facts and undistorted truth are needed as evidence in future court proceedings. Personally speaking, I could never find anything artistically appealing about a picture documenting mangled and bloody bodies.

Iíve always been suspicious of those who insist that the simple corrections in photoshop are ok but the more difficult and demanding processes are illegal, immoral or off limits. After all, photoshop definitely has a phonominal learning curve. I doubt if any one person has ever harnessed all of itís capabilities.

Personally, Iíve always been impressed with beautiful pictures Ė regardless of how they have been accomplished.

Regardless of how good the pure camera version is, the image can always be improved in the darkroom or in photoshop. My opinion is if you want to be the best photographer you can be, you should become familiar with post editing.

I can understand how a seasoned old-school photographer could be resentful of a beginner with a relatively cheap digi-cam and a semester course of photoshop that could produce comparable or superior images.
__________________
Midnitejam-

My Photos Are OK to Edit--Please, show me how the pros do it.
  #39    Top
Old February 14th, 2005, 03:15 AM
leptokurtotic's Avatar
leptokurtotic leptokurtotic is offline
Some Guy
Bronze Commitment Award: This award is given to those who have shown great community dedication & commitment and have over 1,000 posts. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reasonContributor Award: This award is given to those who contribute either an article for the resources section, or contribute to the community in another exemplary way. - Issue reason
Quote:
Iíve always been suspicious of those who insist that the simple corrections in photoshop are ok but the more difficult and demanding processes are illegal, immoral or off limits.
But those are the contest rules! Why? I dunno.

Quote:
A puristí frame of mind is more appropriate in the police department
My mother ran a crime lab for her whole life. One of the crime scene photographers took the pictures at our wedding, even. This isn't related to anything else, although it is true that the police cameras (d100's and Sony Mavicas) have to be altered so that images can't be manipulated before they're saved to locked CDs.

Quote:
Regardless of how good the pure camera version is, the image can always be improved in the darkroom or in photoshop.
Ansel Adams' zone system relies on darkroom technique to deal with shadow/highlight problems. Do people know this? Unlikely.

I think that people who think that "photography" needs to be some hard-core purist mechanical-equipment based enterprise should go whole hog and just shun anything that needs a battery to make it work. They'd still be strangely obsessed with the magical fairies in their equipment, but at least they would be strange in a consistently luddite fashion...
__________________
f(x)=1/[(pi)*(1+x^2)]
Reply
Go Back   PhotographyCorner.com Forums > Photo Sharing Corner > Places




Bookmarks

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Outside My Door be_ginner People 3 July 31st, 2006 01:56 AM
Birdhouse photogintraining Things 3 April 21st, 2006 08:23 AM
28 and 90 focal length birdhouse PsuMason Things 3 April 19th, 2006 07:13 AM
Birdhouse (again) acsalafmeg Places 6 March 29th, 2006 03:28 PM
Birdhouse TanyaL Things 4 October 30th, 2005 08:03 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.