| Author |
Message
|
ckurz7000 |
 Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:08 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Aficionado
Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Posts: 51
|
| chieflong wrote: |
Chris - I like the original. I like the negative space on the right. It also allows for some wording (would make a great backdrop for a poem).
Guy |
Thanks, Guy. I use it as a desktop background on my laptop and the free space on the right now is where all my icons cluster...
-- Chris. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
| nana17 |
| Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 178
|
| i like the original best to. sometimes a picture is better right from the camera. it is what you see when you take the shot. sometimes editing a picture ruins it. imo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 163
|
OK... I'm missing something here... Everyone seems to be mushing over the "original", what you get right out of the camera is what you should stick with..
Can someone explain to me what is the difference between putting a filter on the camera (prior to taking the shot) to produce a sky color that doesn't exist in reality or manuplating white balance, saturation or for that matter cropping a shot for visual impact is different from post production manipulation "editing" of the same elements.
Chris.. this has little to do with your specific shot except as an example of this attitude that seems to prevail among photographers that anything done in our modern computerised cameras to "enhance" a photo before the shot is somehow more "pure" than something done after the shot is taken. To me "adding" an "element" to a weak shot to improve it is not any different than putting a filter on the camera to enhance the color prior to the shot. Both add an element that is otherwise not present in the reality of the moment.
You should should never give me more than 1 cent at a time.
JLW
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| prof1120 |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:58 am Post subject: To edit or not to edit; that is the ........ |
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Bensalem, Pennsylvania
|
The current debate is one that is millennia old, dating back to Plato and Aristotle: to reveal life as it is or to, in a sense, edit it. The classicists held that concept should prevail over form. You don't think George Washington or Napoleon really looked as good as their portraits, do you? This is JWL's viewpoint. Jim, I would guess you're partial to classical architecture vs. modern and Michaelangelo over Pollack.
The "realists" and "naturalists" hold that the world should be revealed as it is, that beauty inheres in truth. And even if the truth is not beautiful, faithful adherence to it is imperative. Nana, this seems to be your viewpoint.
These conflicting viewpoints are archetypal. Both perspectives produce interesting photography, as well as other art forms. Had none of us been privy to Chris' original shot, we'd have never really known that Jim's revision was that - a refinement of an image for the purpose of introducing balance, one of the fundamental qualities of visual aesthetics.
In short, I like the photo both ways! Were we all of one mind, our votes would always be the same in contests. In fact, there'd be no need for contests! In fact, life itself would be rather monochromatic:-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 163
|
Proff...
I want my quarter back...
I swear .. give a guy an education and this is what you get.
All I thought I was asking was ... What came first... The Chicken or the Egg?
Does it really make any difference with todays photographic equipment whether you manipulate the image prior to or after the button is pushed? One is no more representative of reality than the other.
JLW
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| prof1120 |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Bensalem, Pennsylvania
|
| Jim, the quarter is mine...though I owe you for your great suggestion of the title, "Catching the Sun" for one of my images. As for the chicken, why the chicken came first, of course.....after it hatched from the egg of the another chicken! Hope that clarifies it for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| chieflong |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 181
Location: Renfrew, Ontario
|
See what happens when one gives Jim 2˘ HAHAHA
As for editing photos, well it's up to the "artist" and how one wants his work "finished. Whether it's push Ilford 400 to 3200 in the lab or using a filter or using Photoshop really doesn't matter. The final product is what counts for the photographer.
As for saying that I liked the original shot I'm referring to the balance of the photo only and how appealing it is to MY eye. May not be pleasing to everyones eye and that's fine by me.
So since the Canadian $ is now worth more than the greenback that's my 2.003˘ worth.
Guy
_________________
There's only one YOU so make it count!
Amatures built the Arc, Professionals built the Titanic! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ckurz7000 |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aficionado
Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Posts: 51
|
I like it: give JLW 2 cents, lean back and watch what happens! :-)
Seriously, though, I agree with all of you a little bit. JLW is right in that it doesn't really matter whether you slap on a filter before taking the picture or bump up the saturation in Photoshop afterwards. Prof112 is right in that the intent of capturing reality (whatever that might be -- another philosophical debate in the making here) and creating "beautiful" art are two different viewpoints.
The art to me is to visualize in my mind as clearly as possible how the photo ought to turn out before pressing the shutter. I want to catch the motif and not just a starting point from whence to start playing with photoshop. It is more challenging to visualize in your mind and not be able to hit the "undo" button.
But there isn't really a right or wrong in this debate. Just various preferences.
-- Chris. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 163
|
| chieflong wrote: |
See what happens when one gives Jim 2˘ HAHAHA
As for editing photos, well it's up to the "artist" and how one wants his work "finished. Whether it's push Ilford 400 to 3200 in the lab or using a filter or using Photoshop really doesn't matter. The final product is what counts for the photographer.
As for saying that I liked the original shot I'm referring to the balance of the photo only and how appealing it is to MY eye. May not be pleasing to everyones eye and that's fine by me.
So since the Canadian $ is now worth more than the greenback that's my 2.003˘ worth.
Guy |
I always prefered Tri-x with D76 in the tank. You say tomato and I say tomatoe.
BTW I don't think I gave you a thumb up on the silhouette shot. It's always nice to see something a little unexpected around here.
JLW
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLW |
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fanatic
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 163
|
| ckurz7000 wrote: |
I like it: give JLW 2 cents, lean back and watch what happens! :-)
Seriously, though, I agree with all of you a little bit. JLW is right in that it doesn't really matter whether you slap on a filter before taking the picture or bump up the saturation in Photoshop afterwards. Prof112 is right in that the intent of capturing reality (whatever that might be -- another philosophical debate in the making here) and creating "beautiful" art are two different viewpoints.
The art to me is to visualize in my mind as clearly as possible how the photo ought to turn out before pressing the shutter. I want to catch the motif and not just a starting point from whence to start playing with photoshop. It is more challenging to visualize in your mind and not be able to hit the "undo" button.
But there isn't really a right or wrong in this debate. Just various preferences.
-- Chris. |
Well now... If there is no hope in prevailing with my position in this debate I must end my participation immediately and reserve my meger resources for another issue. I have an ego to protect after all.
Chris.. I shared your opinion of the art of the capture when I was shooting 35mm film and paid dearly for processing. Unfortunately... since the digital age has been sprung upon me I must admit to being a "lazy" photographer. I go about taking snapshots with little regard to more than basic composition and then find the "art" for me is "discovering" the hidden treasure in an otherwise mundane shot.
I love placing or leaving one element in a shot that is completely incongruent with the rest of the image. Around here it is almost always that element that elicits a comment from someone. When I get bored I simply throw together a bunch of elements from different shots and see what I come up with.
Anyhow.. It's nice to have a few others around here to spar with in the forum. The Chief and I were getting tired of trading geese.
JLW
_________________
Orville Wright didn’t have a pilot's license. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Live Chat
