Im the complete opposite. I look at a picture first to admire the technique and then stand back to see if there is any meaning to their picture and if I only see a photograph I dismiss and walk away.
We are like yin and yang.
Im the complete opposite. I look at a picture first to admire the technique and then stand back to see if there is any meaning to their picture and if I only see a photograph I dismiss and walk away.Once I see a photograph heavily manipulate a photograph by adding or removing major constituents, I automatically dismiss all the rest of the photographer's work as fiction and not worth wasting my retinas viewing anything else from him or her. It is a good way to get blown off.
You are twisting my point. That's not what I meant. It probably takes one or a few clicks to remove a mountain from a pic. A few more clicks a river is stitched in. These are what I meant. Do you still consider that art work? I call that cheap creativity, not art.As far as altering a photo goes, what is considered altering by this elite, esteemed group of experts? If a photographer burns part image to minimize or obliterate it, is that an adulteration of the photo?.
You are twisting my point. That's not what I meant. It probably takes one or a few clicks to remove a mountain from a pic. A few more clicks a river is stitched in. These are what I meant. Do you still consider that art work? I call that cheap creativity, not art.
Once I see a photograph heavily manipulate a photograph by adding or removing major constituents, I automatically dismiss all the rest of the photographer's work as fiction and not worth wasting my retinas viewing anything else from him or her. It is a good way to get blown off.
And when did I say I liked any of this? Or this asinine discussion for that matter?You are twisting my point. That's not what I meant. It probably takes one or a few clicks to remove a mountain from a pic. A few more clicks a river is stitched in. These are what I meant. Do you still consider that art work? I call that cheap creativity, not art.
You are twisting my point. That's not what I meant. It probably takes one or a few clicks to remove a mountain from a pic. A few more clicks a river is stitched in. These are what I meant. Do you still consider that art work? I call that cheap creativity, not art.
You are twisting my point. That's not what I meant. It probably takes one or a few clicks to remove a mountain from a pic. A few more clicks a river is stitched in. These are what I meant. Do you still consider that art work? I call that cheap creativity, not art.
Sub question of the thread: Why shoot film just to scan it? For black and white I don't see a whole lot of point. I like printing black and white and I think it looks best doing that.
It may be an artist's rendering but it was fabricated from photographs, with the intention to give it the authenticity of a photograph--"In 1930, International News Photos distributed this manipulated photograph. At the time, no airship had docked at the Empire State Building. That didn’t happen until September 1931, when a privately-owned dirigible docked for a mere three minutes, in a 40-mile-per-hour wind."
How is what you described less creative than pointing a camera and clicking the shutter at a bird on a branch or babbling brook or finding someone else's tripod holes and shooting el cap or whatever? I find it strange that its less creative to take a photograph or two or 3 and re-work it the way one wants to re-work it, than a "snapshot". just wondering if this cut and paste job is cheap creativity too?: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/302289You are twisting my point. That's not what I meant. It probably takes one or a few clicks to remove a mountain from a pic. A few more clicks a river is stitched in. These are what I meant. Do you still consider that art work? I call that cheap creativity, not art.
You'll never know just how real or fake they are. Did a photographer go out and actually shoot a real scene to produce that great looking photo or just create it on a computer? The artistic value of photographs will go down when anyone can just bang one out with software, just like gold would have little value if it were plentiful.
why does it matter unless it is photojournalism? every photograph is fake / fantasy, not reality.
Why get up at 3am to catch the sunrise in your shot when you can sleep late until 10am and during breakfast clone in a sunrise using your computer that looks better? In fact, why shoot pictures at all? The only honest and valuable pictures left will be those snapshots people take with their families while on vacation and stuff in a photo album. Just like 50 years ago. People will laugh at all the Photoshopped silliness and ignore them as being common.In time, I think it will get that way with more and more photographs we see.
You'll never know just how real or fake they are. Did a photographer go out and actually shoot a real scene to produce that great looking photo or just create it on a computer? The artistic value of photographs will go down when anyone can just bang one out with software, just like gold would have little value if it were plentiful.
Because you enjoy it. You can also ask why shoot film if digital is easier and faster.Why get up at 3am to catch the sunrise in your shot when you can sleep late until 10am and during breakfast clone in a sunrise using your computer that looks better?
If it is a great photo and contents are real, it is far more special to me than one just cobbled together on a computer.
In time, I think it will get that way with more and more photographs we see.
You'll never know just how real or fake they are. Did a photographer go out and actually shoot a real scene to produce that great looking photo or just create it on a computer? The artistic value of photographs will go down when anyone can just bang one out with software, just like gold would have little value if it were plentiful.
Does that mean you can't like an image you're viewing until you know its provenance?
Takes a bit more work than that for now. On the other hand, Luminar makes replacing your sky terribly easy-- So if I build a library of skies for my area, and replace a flat, hazy sky with a slightly more interesting one (from the same region, taken by me) without changing the composition, or any structural element, have I cheated?
...
It's disheartening to get up at 3 a.m. in the morning to catch the sunrise and get a really great photo at the end of the day only to have the viewer look at you quizzically and ask suspiciously, "Did you photoshop it?"Because you enjoy it. You can also ask why shoot film if digital is easier and faster.
It's disheartening to get up at 3 a.m. in the morning to catch the sunrise and get a really great photo at the end of the day only to have the viewer look at you quizzically and ask suspiciously, "Did you photoshop it?"
I see in the future photographers selling fewer and fewer great photos since potential buyers know they could just cobble something together just as good on their computers.
Ordinary camera and photographic equipment sales will drop, as sales for image creating software from stock photos will increase.
Yes, why go out and shoot anything real, it has all been done for you.
But why even do that, why not just imagine photos in our minds. Much cheaper and easier. Who needs anything real?
I believe that's why there's a trend towards film. People want to get back to basics and feel like they're actually doing something beyond cobbling together a bunch of ones and zeros on a computer sitting at home. The physical on hands film experience, longer shooting time, waiting for the results, adds interest and mystery to the process.I see in the future photographers selling fewer and fewer great photos since potential buyers know they could just cobble something together just as good on their computers.
Ordinary camera and photographic equipment sales will drop, as sales for image creating software from stock photos will increase.
Yes, why go out and shoot anything real, it has all been done for you.
But why even do that, why not just imagine photos in our minds. Much cheaper and easier. Who needs anything real?
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?