The "judge" (whatever those qualifications are) stated the photographer should improve his photoshop skills, so she clearly believed the image was digitally produced.
That, in itself, I don't find offensive - but the cavalier suggestions for improving it are presumptuous. She didn't accept that the print looked exactly the way the photographer wanted it to look. Instead, she offered the type of advice you find on certain digital photography forums by people who've mastered 3 months of photoshop.
IDK seems like often times the shoe fits the same on the other foot..
Three months? I found it to take much less time.
you mastered photoshop in less than 3 months ???Not really. After many years in the darkroom I still am learning better methods and techniques. That is why I go to workshops I have not even touched carbon prints, platinum paladium, color tinting, and emultions making.
I also get a chuckle from the term "fine art". David Vestal riffed on this once by asking, if there is fine art does it follow there is medium art or coarse art?
To be honest a lot of people who use digital think this is the be all and end all and nothing else is worth bothering with. I 'do' photography mostly for pleasure and still appreciate and welcome the challenge of making a colour or mono print using no more technology than my personal skill which I can do most times but there is still a challenge of getting everything right 1st time which start in the camera and not sat in front of a screen working on what may be imperfections afterwards.
I do use digital for work and have access to a decent set of Nikon kit, but whatever I use I do not have the self satisfaction that I get with film. Sorry guys but that is my preference and no one is going to change that..
At no time did I say one was better than the other.
+1Coarse art is what I create in my garage with my grinder and welder.
Sure you did. You clearly believe that digital shooters can't, or don't try to, get it right in camera ("there is still a challenge of getting everything right 1st time which start in the camera and not sat in front of a screen working on what may be imperfections afterwards."). Poor technique produces inferior results, regardless of technology. Good photographers know that, and if they're using digital, they use editing software as a tool, not a crutch.
I have a hard time believing there are so many people trying to get film shooters to change to digital.
Your phrase 'you clearly believe digital shooters can't, or don't try to get it right in the camera' is absolutely pure conjecture on your part. It is your take on the matter, or your interpretation (flawed), but at no time did I say outright what you are alleging. Your comment is almost like putting words in my mouth which I would ignore anyway. I repeat what I said in that each to their own, but I know what I get the most pleasure out of and will continue to do so. If I touched on a nerve and you don't like my opinion about what I prefer - so be it!
jnanz, thanks for bringing some reality to this pissant OT and subsequent argument.
It's too easy to jump for the ISO button or crank up the shutter speed to 1/8000, and on a camera that can shoot 6fps... When you have a "get it done" workaholic mindset like mine, it can be hard to overcome that temptation.
Film teaches patience. Not so with digital.
Besides, the texture is something that just can't be matched
It’s important because he/she needs to enjoy it enough to invest the time to produce something worthwhile. It would be incredibly rare to spend a lot of time on something you don’t enjoy.
there is still a challenge of getting everything right 1st time which start in the camera
I guess we cannot say this enough. As a digital shooter and an educator of digital shooters from ages 16 to 86 (so far), we shoot to get the very best exposure possible just as some film folk do.I agree that a lot of people who use digital think this is the be all and end all and nothing else is worth bothering with. I 'do' photography mostly for pleasure and still appreciate and welcome the challenge of making a colour or mono print using no more technology than my personal skill which I can do most times but there is still a challenge of getting everything right 1st time which start in the camera and not sat in front of a screen working on what may be imperfections afterwards.
I agree that a lot of people who use digital think this is the be all and end all and nothing else is worth bothering with. I 'do' photography mostly for pleasure and still appreciate and welcome the challenge of making a colour or mono print using no more technology than my personal skill which I can do most times but there is still a challenge of getting everything right 1st time which start in the camera and not sat in front of a screen working on what may be imperfections afterwards.
I guess we cannot say this enough. As a digital shooter and an educator of digital shooters from ages 16 to 86 (so far), we shoot to get the very best exposure possible just as some film folk do.
Once someone sees that they cannot get what they wanted from a capture they become much more careful. Under- or over-exposure, inaccurate color settings, poor use of depth of field or SS all have prices that one simply cannot meet on a computer. Some think you can, but they are mistaken.
That is no different with someone who cares, than with film. A bullet-proof or translucent neg teaches you the same lesson. Dodging, burning, flashing can't always bring an image to where it could have been. Photographers come to regret not making the best of the camera's capabilities.
All true. However the proper exposure for both slides and digital is based on the highlights due to the relatively narrow exposure range, while color and black & white negatives have the exposure latitude to expose for the shade detail. Note negative film can also be exposed for the highlights, possibly [depends on film and developer] at the loss of some shadow detail.
I thought I heard an echo:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...otography-deniers.166375/page-10#post-2199942
Got any thoughts of your own about the topic?
Why the "however"?
Except that it isn't.In this case "However" is the logical equivalent of "And".
It is that person's first post. Perhaps they were trying to quote the prior post but did not know how...or they were over zealous in editing the quote?
I agree that a lot of people who use digital think this is the be all and end all and nothing else is worth bothering with. I 'do' photography mostly for pleasure and still appreciate and welcome the challenge of making a colour or mono print using no more technology than my personal skill which I can do most times but there is still a challenge of getting everything right 1st time which start in the camera and not sat in front of a screen working on what may be imperfections afterwards.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?