Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,772   Posts: 1,516,541   Online: 877
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44

Thread: Is it or not?

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    22
    Is digital painting better than oil painting?

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,231
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by George Losse
    Mark,
    I know you asked this question with the thought of digital vs analog....

    But what if you turn it to two analog processes instead, say a silver contact print vs. a Pt/PD print? does that change your answer?

    That is a question that has haunted me for a long time.
    And MY answer (for now) is the final image is all that matters. That's why I contact print from in camera negatives. Others see the world differently, thankfully.

    and that may explain why there are so many flavors of ice cream.
    Different people will think different things are best.
    Actually that was not my intention at all. As I said I might post to see if their answers were any different. No matter what the process or the final image is, it is, for me, the journey that matters. Digital, Pt/Pd, Silver Chloride, or Silver geletin, or dye carbon what ever. So, no, the answer would not change.

    I admit to having a bias towards analogue methods but I do make posters when I feel like it. I like cnmne's answer.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,231
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Leonidas
    Is digital painting better than oil painting?
    I guess that would depend on the image
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota Tropics
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by Leonidas
    Is digital painting better than oil painting?
    Is digital sex better than analog sex?
    Are we seeing the light yet?

    Digital mavens can sit on their ass making pictures.
    Photographers have to Be There.

    The differences are myriad.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,293
    Well, how would you hang the process on the wall?

  6. #26
    FrankB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Northwest UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,147
    Images
    24
    I'm an amateur and make pictures because I enjoy it. My work involves sitting at a computer for eight hours a day (and the rest!). I enjoy the traditional process as an escape from that and also in its own right.

    I have no axe to grind with digital (except that it is making the materials I need for my hobby harder to come by and more expensive!), it just doesn't float my boat.

    For the rest... well, I've just changed my sig.

    All the best,

    Frank
    The destination is important, but so is the journey

  7. #27
    B-3
    B-3 is offline
    B-3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Paradise
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    191
    I think the process does matter to the one engaged in it - the satisfaction of doing what you love and getting the results you want from it - these are the very basic reasons that any of us do what we do as artists.

    But from the perspective of audience - I have seen absolutely stunning photographs, on the web and in person, that were so powerful that it did not matter to me one bit whether the photographer used digital, film, glass plates, whatever - I was just glad they made the image. And I have seen photographs (both on the web and in person) that were presented as the culmination of a process - "I did this, I did that, then I did this..." and while it may have been an enjoyable journey for the person doing it, the end result did absolutely nothing for me as a viewer.

    Artists, I believe, are intimately concerned with process, but in service to an end - the image and its ability to communicate. Putting process on a pedestal above "the image" is the mark of artisans and craftspeople.

    I also think that open-mindedness, a desire to experiment, and curiousity are all signs of a creative mind, but these appear to be in short supply, especially when people are taking sides in the "process wars".

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    701
    I'm just a "hobbiest" but for me the process is as important as the final image, and not just in regards to photography. I might be over-stating but I think in this day an age it's a lot easier to let techonology do the work or have it guide you through it. People want shortcuts and less tasking ways to get from point A to point B. I prefer to slow down, learn the process, and take pride in the work that comes from practice, consideration, and whatever time and effort I have to put in for completion. I'm not into instant gratification, especially if it means I'm not getting an equivalent end product.

  9. #29
    Joe Lipka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    808
    I am "process neutral" when it comes to looking at images. One of the very old Kodak bromides (bromide as in common statement, rather than an enlarging paper ) was that if you are more aware of the photographic technique than the photograph, you have failed. Technique should not call attention to itself, but should reinforce the message delivered by the artwork. You should be impressed by the image, not the way it was made. We have all seen photographs in all media that range from regrettable to unforgettable. So, it seems to me that the final result depends on the decision the photographer makes on what process he wants to use to communicate his message to his audience.
    Two New Projects! Light on China - 07/13/2014

    www.joelipkaphoto.com

    250+ posts and still blogging! "Postcards from the Creative Journey"

    http://blog.joelipkaphoto.com/

  10. #30
    Greg Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crestview Hills, KY
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,895
    In my own work, I use the process that gives me the results I want from my photographs. The process has changed over time as I push myself harder to attain a greater level of quality.

    When I look at other people's art, I don't usually ask what process they used unless the resulting print was a surprise to me. For example, a friend of mine showed me some prints with a very cool brown color and I couldn't think of what caused it. I asked. It was reverse sepia toning, something I had never heard of before. If they were plain black and white prints, I wouldn't have asked. This process gave him what he wanted, but it was a tool to achieve it, not the point in itself.

    -Greg
    www.gregorytdavis.com

    Did millions of people suddenly disappear? This may have an answer.

    "No one knows that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." -Matthew 24:36

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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