Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,263   Posts: 1,680,700   Online: 914
      
Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 134
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,212
    Would you all like it as much if Adams had done all the dodging and burning manipulation using Photoshop?

    Using Photoshop would have required the exactly same artistic interpretation on the image he had originally captured.

  2. #72
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,975
    Images
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by ROL View Post
    +1. Eye of the beholder. Some are blind.
    Okay, I am on my second scotch -- nothing pisses me more than when I point out, lets say, an upper corner of blank sky that destroys the sense of balance in an image...and I hear back, "But that was just the way it was!"...I want to wring their neck and say, "Then don't take the bloody picture -- or at least don't print the dang thing!"

    But I don't because I actually know what they are trying to say and we all have to make these errors and hopefully learn from them.

    Would you all like it as much if Adams had done all the dodging and burning manipulation using Photoshop?
    Probably not, since it would have been taken at a different point of time in the history of photography and probably would have been too heavy a hand put on the sharpening filter. And in color and printed too large -- I have seen Moonrise printed in mural size...too bloody big.
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Enroute
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Prof_Pixel View Post
    Would you all like it as much if Adams had done all the dodging and burning manipulation using Photoshop?

    Using Photoshop would have required the exactly same artistic interpretation on the image he had originally captured.
    No, I would not have liked it, because it would not have been hand made, now days, there is computer made and then there is everything that is not computer made, big, big difference in the required talent and persistence.

    And I disagree with you in terms of what the artistic interpretation of the image would have been if photoshop were around. It simply was not and there is no going back from that....thank god.

    Personally, I have never been one to manipulate images to the degree that Adams did and *certainly* not to the point of the worthless garbage I see from people using photoshop. But I did have a "Hernandez" moment this year and I am still quite taken aback that I pulled it off, all in the way I saw it, shot it, souped it and printed it, requiring every ounce of technique and talent I could pull together. It took a ton of work and the result is not something you can get from a computer photo....
    "I'm the freak that shoots film. God bless the freaks!" ~ Mainecoonmaniac ~

  4. #74
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,350
    Images
    50
    Perhaps one's appreciation is also dependent to a certain degree on one's willingness to participate in the viewing experience.

    In today's culture many have come to expect to be passively entertained, or engaged, or moved, or informed, or whatever, without ever realizing that they must also actively contribute to that process in order to fully experience it.

    If you stand in front of a photograph and simply wait for it to speak to you, you could be in for a long wait. The viewing needs to be participatory. Same with a book. You can stare at it on the table until the cows come home, but until you make the effort to actually open and read it, not much literary appreciation is going to happen.

    Ken
    "When making a portrait, my approach is quite the same as when I am portraying a rock. I do not wish to impose my personality upon the sitter, but, keeping myself open to receive reactions from his own special ego, record this with nothing added: except of course when I am working professionally, when money enters in,—then for a price, I become a liar..."

    — Edward Weston, Daybooks, Vol. II, February 2, 1932

  5. #75
    Leigh B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,035
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    I want to wring their neck and say, "Then don't take the bloody picture -- or at least don't print the dang thing!" But I don't because I actually know what they are trying to say and we all have to make these errors and hopefully learn from them.
    And what if the original photographer says: "I like it that way. That's why I took the photo."

    Who are you to decide that the pic contains an "error"? Are you the final arbiter of artistic vision on this planet?

    - Leigh
    “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” - Plato

  6. #76
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,975
    Images
    40
    All depend, Leigh. If they considered all the aspects of the image and liked it that way, fine -- I don't have to like it for it to be a good image to them. But if they just, for example, looked at the subject without considering the entire image, and the rest of the image detracts from their subject, then they have failed to make the best image they are capable of. But some people feel like 'okay' is good enough...and usually they say in their defense, "I like it that way. That's why I took the photo."

    I broke one of my own rules and critiqued a baby picture -- a dumb thing to do. Rarely can a parent see past the baby.

    Another classic is the tree or post growing out of someone's head. The photographer might still like the photo because of their relationship to the subject. But it still a fail as a photograph. Unless, of course the photographer wanted the tree growing out their subject's head for some odd or even logical reason.

    Rules of composition are meant to be broken, but it helps to know the rules first...but sometimes one can get lucky.
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  7. #77
    Leigh B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,035
    Images
    1
    Vaughn,

    The problem that I had with your comment is you have no idea what the shooter was thinking of when he tripped the shutter.

    You're basing your statements on total speculation.

    - Leigh
    “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” - Plato

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    3,659
    The logistical problem was simple: just getting the contrast range on the film before the light changed. So there's the story of how he calculated that since he couldn't locate his light meter.
    But the darkroom trick in that era was water bath development. So he ended up with a highly compensated neg which produced a much softer more luminous print than what all this chatter is
    about. Nowadays, some of those earlier renditions of Moonrise actually sell for more because they
    are rare and allegedly even more "vintage". Then for some marketing, esthetic, or maybe personality
    reason he wanted something more dramatic and contrasty and differentially enhanced the negative.
    I thought it was overdone; but that more theatrical mode is what defines several of AA's most famous landscapes - inky black skies, high contrast. He certainly could make a poetic image at times,
    but I never would consider him as the best printer of the era. And thank goodness, he didn't have
    Fauxtoshop. Too many options just lead nowhere.

  9. #79

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,212
    Quote Originally Posted by DREW WILEY View Post
    And thank goodness, he didn't have Fauxtoshop. Too many options just lead nowhere.

    Photoshop is simply another tool - and like all tools, can be used for good or bad.

    Someplace I saw an article where someone created a set of layers in Photoshop that implemented all of Adam's printing instructions.

    IMO, manipulation in any form is manipulation.

  10. #80
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,350
    Images
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Prof_Pixel View Post
    Someplace I saw an article where someone created a set of layers in Photoshop that implemented all of Adam's printing instructions.
    Oh dear...



    Ken
    "When making a portrait, my approach is quite the same as when I am portraying a rock. I do not wish to impose my personality upon the sitter, but, keeping myself open to receive reactions from his own special ego, record this with nothing added: except of course when I am working professionally, when money enters in,—then for a price, I become a liar..."

    — Edward Weston, Daybooks, Vol. II, February 2, 1932



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin