"Photography IS Film"

[removed account4]

holy cr@p i thought i took the blue pill ..

 

[moose10101]

May I correct you? I posited that ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (not technology) applied to making pictures would destroy the meaning of photography, or even art.
A lever is a "technology."
These are not subtle misquotes and misunderstandings. What you think I said, and what I said, are world's apart.

Using PS to add a moon, vs. using a second negative to add a moon, are not “worlds apart”.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

.

Using PS to add a moon, vs. using a second negative to add a moon, are not “worlds apart”.

Well, there's a non sequitur. I was correcting your attempt at quoting me.

 

[FujiLove]

Using PS to add a moon, vs. using a second negative to add a moon, are not “worlds apart”.

They are world's apart. One requires a high degree of human skill, understanding of various pieces of equipment and materials. It can't be automated or produced by a computer. The other can be achieved with a phone, automatically with software, with no human skill or understanding.

Very different on many levels, even if the end result is similar.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I like things made by people, things made by computers are with out soul. Teaching myself how to make pictures so I can make one for the lounge room wall. It is hard, but I will persevere. Dont want perfection, only your god can be perfect, just something snazzy that will go with the decor.
Wish there were another name film photography so I wouldnt have to first explain that Im using a film camera and no its still pictures not motion pictures and Im not a photographer, just someone who wants to make pictures....whys it so hard to make understand.

I taught computer architecture for a decade and I agree with you.

 

[Sirius Glass]

May I correct you? I posited that ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (not technology) applied to making pictures would destroy the meaning of photography, or even art.
A lever is a "technology."
These are not subtle misquotes and misunderstandings. What you think I said, and what I said, are world's apart.

I also designed and built practical artificial intelligent systems. I guess one could try a shot at REAL STUPIDITY.

 

[TheRook]

Sometimes when I switch to digital photography after a long period of only film photography, it feels like I am doing a digital simulation of photography, not the real thing.

 

[FujiLove]

"Photography is film." - Ken Rockwell

Out of curiosity, where did he say that? It would be (very mildly) interesting to read the context. When I'm really bored.

 

[michr]

They are world's apart. One requires a high degree of human skill, understanding of various pieces of equipment and materials. It can't be automated or produced by a computer. The other can be achieved with a phone, automatically with software, with no human skill or understanding.

Very different on many levels, even if the end result is similar.

I've never added a moon to a photograph. Is it hard to do?

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Out of curiosity, where did he say that? It would be (very mildly) interesting to read the context. When I'm really bored.

I didn't save the particular link. Whenever one searches for a photography related subject Ken's links show up and I am often browsing through his comments on something or another. But, if I come across it, I will point it out for you. His web site is vast.

 

[FujiLove]

I've never added a moon to a photograph. Is it hard to do?

Not in Photoshop. I wouldn't know where to start in the darkroom.

 

[michr]

Not in Photoshop. I wouldn't know where to start in the darkroom.

I think all there is to it is to take your photograph, leaving a blank spot for the moon. Move your camera over to where the moon is, framing it so that the moon is in the empty space. Change your shutter and aperture settings to 1/ISO and f/11 (moony 11 rule).

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Step one: Open computer
Step two: "Ok Google...add a big harvest moon to this photo."
You can bet Google's AI is way the hell more sophisticated than Photoshop, which is roughly like a hacksaw in a world of micro lasers!
Coming soon.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Recently I saw a survey in which UK photographers voted effectively for their personal opinion greatest photographers.
They were , IIRC, 100% film photographers, mainly from North America.
Yet these guys who voted were nearly all digital shooters.
Probably because it is easier to copy the great photographers using digital.
Not many have the time and ability to follow the craft of film.

 

[faberryman]

Probably because it is easier to copy the great photographers using digital. Not many have the time and ability to follow the craft of film.

What nonsense. It doesn't take any more ability to do "the craft of film" than digital. They are just different skill sets. This is all part of the attempt by a cabal of film aficionados to make some great mystery out shooting and processing film.

 

[Alan Johnson]

If you say my explanation why the majority shoot digital is nonsense how do you explain it?

 

[faberryman]

Probably because it is easier to copy the great photographers using digital.
Not many have the time and ability to follow the craft of film.

What nonsense. It doesn't take any more ability to do "the craft of film" than digital. They are just different skill sets. This is all part of the attempt by a cabal of film aficionados to make some great mystery out shooting and processing film.

If you say my explanation why the majority shoot digital is nonsense how do you explain it?

More people shoot digital than film because most people shoot with their phones and share their images on social media. It doesn't have anything to do with being easier to copy the great photographers. Most people don't even know who the great photographers are. They are more interested in their vacation, kids, and family.

 

[Luckless]

If you say my explanation why the majority shoot digital is nonsense how do you explain it?

Rather than "Not many have the time or ability", I would argue that "Not many see any advantage to putting up with all the drawbacks and the limited benefits that come with film" is the far more likely option. Film is, shockingly, not actually that hard.

 

[Alan Johnson]

More people shoot digital than film because most people shoot with their phones and share their images on social media. It doesn't have anything to do with being easier to copy the great photographers. Most people don't even know who the great photographers are. They are more interested in their vacation, kids, and family.

See post 189, I specifically referred to a group of mostly digital shooters who did know who great photographers were (in their opinion),the selected great photographers were film photographers.
You are addressing a different group."most people"

 

[blockend]

Not in Photoshop. I wouldn't know where to start in the darkroom.

One way was to put a penny on the photographic paper for part of the exposure. Another one I used to do back in the 1980s was to shoot a scene including the sun at the smallest aperture and fastest shutter speed available. The sun looks exactly like the moon and the scene is day-for-night.

 

[FujiLove]

One way was to put a penny on the photographic paper for part of the exposure. Another one I used to do back in the 1980s was to shoot a scene including the sun at the smallest aperture and fastest shutter speed available. The sun looks exactly like the moon and the scene is day-for-night.

I guess 'adding a moon' is just about the easiest photo manipulation one could have chosen, either using a multiple exposure in camera or later in the darkroom.

Let's see how people get on with creating convincing photos like these in the darkroom:

1. 'Enhance' a model's bust
2. Remove a politician from a row of people
3. Make it look like a Great White is attacking a helicopter
4. Remove a cigarette dangling from an actor's mouth

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/02/05/the-most-famous-photoshopped-images-of-all-time/

When you need fake, you need digital.

 

[FujiLove]

And for balance, yes, I'm fully aware it's all possible in the darkroom. But can you imagine the skill and time required to do this convincingly? Clearly, it helps if you have the resources of a dictator!

https://www.pocket-lint.com/apps/ne...pped-and-doctored-images-from-across-the-ages

 

[blockend]

1. 'Enhance' a model's bust
2. Remove a politician from a row of people
3. Make it look like a Great White is attacking a helicopter
4. Remove a cigarette dangling from an actor's mouth

1. Tissue paper was the traditional method
2. The Kremlin balcony photographs
3. The ones on YouTube are comically bad
4. Why?

There's no doubt digital image manipulation software makes things easier, the question is why anyone would want to do them?

 

[darkosaric]

I've never added a moon to a photograph. Is it hard to do?

It is easy:

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Have you used the "MyDrone" photography app yet? You download the app, and select from a series of locations (where MyDrone is operating) and then choose what time of day you'd like the camera drone to fly for you. You don't operate the drone's flight controls, but from the drone view on your screen you do press the "shutter button" whenever you like during the flight time you bought. Each photo you take is sent back to your computer as a JPG.

Questions:
When someone posts, or prints and displays the image from the drone, do they list themselves as "photographer?"
Is there any photographic meaning to being somewhere, and seeing something with your own eyes, while making a photograph?
Suppose, it eventually leaks out that the drone wasn't flying in real time for YOU, but that a movie, previously shot, was playing and you were essentially just snapping stills from that movie. Is the image still "your photograph?"
Is there any philosophical difference then between selecting a photograph and making a photograph?
Is "snapping a still from a remote webcam" also photography?
How about "ordering" a photograph through descriptors from a service that maintains billions of photographs in a catalog that you can claim as a one off?
What is the essence of photography, that without it, it becomes something else?

Disclaimer: I know of no such "drone service" right now. These ideas are just possible futures that will impact the meaning of photography.