Arrangement of a scene

[Alan Klein]

I didn't know liter was part of nature.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I didn't know liter was part of nature.

Only in a metric nature.

 

[cliveh]

I didn't know liter was part of nature.

Only in human nature.

 

[LAG]

I didn't know liter was part of nature.

Only in a metric nature.

Only in human nature.

That's a perfect example of a response of the viewer, only by removing and "t" from litter, in an arrangement of a post

 

[Sirius Glass]

​

​

That's a perfect example of a response of the viewer, only by removing and "l" from litter, in an arrangement of a post

Did you mean 't'?

 

[Doc W]

When I photograph, I am not trying to record the reality in front of me but to interpret it. Sometimes that involves changing it to some extent, up to and including removing annoying weeds in the foreground.

 

[LAG]

Did you mean 't'?

I mean it, yes (it seems that you are the only one who pays attention) (wink)

p.s. Edited

 

[Eric Rose]

I am not currently a PJ, nor a forensic crime scene photographer. I am an artist (well trying to be) and I work very hard to "create" my images to inspire a specific reaction in the viewer. If something in the frame detracts from this mission I either remove it, modify it or just move myself to another vantage point. I have absolutely no problem with removing twigs, garbage, dead bugs or whatever is detracting from the image. Sometimes I will add things in to help create the right image. I also crop in the darkroom as necessary so as you can see I am a total photographic heretic

I use to photograph with a buddy who would have fits every time I moved something. I respected his MO and eventually he learned to respect mine. Well he gave up scolding me anyway. He was a member of APUG and is now reading APUG from beyond the pearly gates. I am sure he is imploring God to fog all my film when I resort to my hedonistic photographic scene manipulations.

 

[MattKing]

Well he gave up scolding me anyway. He was a member of APUG and is now reading APUG from beyond the pearly gates. I am sure he is imploring God to fog all my film when I resort to my hedonistic photographic scene manipulations.

So Eric, would it be his RB67 film backs I now have?
Just wondering if I need to be careful.

 

[Eric Rose]

Yes it would be.

 

[MattKing]

Then I may be in trouble, because I moved a twig today to improve a composition, and I used my RB67 to photograph it.

 

[Vaughn]

Is waiting for people to get out one's 'scene' count as manipulation?

 

[tedr1]

Definitely! And so also does waiting for them to get into the exact desired spot in the scene Manipulation is inherent and necessary in photography, it begins with the choices where and when the camera is pointed.

 

[removed account4]

Is waiting for people to get out one's 'scene' count as manipulation?

YES !

 

[Sirius Glass]

Then I may be in trouble, because I moved a twig today to improve a composition, and I used my RB67 to photograph it.

Did you put it back?

 

[Ron789]

Is waiting for people to get out one's 'scene' count as manipulation?

No. But using firearms to remove them definitely is.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is waiting for people to get out one's 'scene' count as manipulation?

No. But using firearms to remove them definitely is.

And phasers set on incinerate often come to mind.

 

[MattKing]

Did you put it back?

Nah, it is now located at a nearby location - also on the forest floor.

 

[Eric Rose]

Nah, it is now located at a nearby location - also on the forest floor.

That little voice you heard was Wayne giving you crap

 

[michaelorr]

No. But using firearms to remove them definitely is.

If its tourist season, why can't we shoot them? (maybe this comment belongs more in the joke forum, not here...)

 

[michaelorr]

More to the point of the OP, sometimes things in the scene bother me, and i try to fix. Sometimes when i do that, trying to remove or cut out of the view, actually screws it all up, by excluding an otherwise mo' better composition, despite the offending intrusion.

Making those decisions seem sensible; Deciding to leave EVERYTHING in place for no other reason or purpose but to be "faithful" to the image and setting, seems to me to be not very helpful. There should be no rules, but there should be purpose and desired outcome.

 

[Sirius Glass]

More to the point of the OP, sometimes things in the scene bother me, and i try to fix. Sometimes when i do that, trying to remove or cut out of the view, actually screws it all up, by excluding an otherwise mo' better composition, despite the offending intrusion.

Making those decisions seem sensible; Deciding to leave EVERYTHING in place for no other reason or purpose but to be "faithful" to the image and setting, seems to me to be not very helpful. There should be no rules, but there should be purpose and desired outcome.

I always follow the rules of photography unless I am going to break them, which I usually do.

 

[Ces1um]

According to the butterfly effect, that sneeze you took affected local wind patterns which blew that twig onto that step. Clearly it's your fault it's even on the step in the first place and it's your duty to remove it. If your photo is improved by cleaning up your mess then that's just the icing on the cake. This entire thread is a very funny discussion.

 

[faberryman]

Something about cutting off your nose to spite your face comes to mind. Dogma makes that possible.

 

[LAG]

Is waiting for people to get out one's 'scene' count as manipulation?

Of course it is, and the same applies to the rest of the animals, in this case you can call it "animalipulation"