Hi to all on 365 the discussion I would like to offer is the use of Photoshop and such like? On 365 we see time and time again totally false photo's which is nothing like the original shot. So is this taken a photograph or is it art ? I have to say say art ! as a photo is what the camera see at a given time
I agree that extreme editing is art, not photography in the recording or documenting sense. Lets call it Photo-art. It is a good part of the fun and creativity of this medium.
Ever since the advent of photography people have experimented in the dark room and in the past we would still have classified their results as 'photos' Surely the digital darkroom is just the modern day equivalent, just a lot less messy!!! I think it is one of those subjects that will always be open to debate though.
People that think that editing in photoshop or the like isn't part of photography are ignorant of the history of photography. This horse is dead. I wish people would stop kicking it, and actually study the history of photography.
Get out and shoot, edit or don't, enjoy what you create, and stop worrying about what others do or don't do!
If we're talking pie - I'm partial to chocolate cream... Or apple pie w ice cream :)
I think some debate is healthy - and I think there are times when photo manipulation is not appropriate (photo journalism for example)... But overall - I'd like to think it is all art...
i like to think i got a open mind, and anything new is good, i love taking photos but i use hdr software now because it bring the photo near to a painting, i can't paint but i can take photos and art is in the eye of the beholder
@knights, in terms of your larger question, there's editing and there's editing. Just as film didn't capture the exact same wavelengts and the exact same details as the human eye saw in the scene being photographed, the digital camera often doesn't capture the scene exactly as I remember it, especially if I'm shooting in less than ideal light. So I'd say any editing that is done to restore the details or the colors the photographer saw when he/she took the photo is completely legitimate. Ansel Adams was not only a great photographer, he was a darkroom wizard.
For those who enjoy this discussion, I would like to sweeten the pot just a bit, are shots taken in HDR or effects modes, done in camera, considered SOOC?
@acloserlookpbd I have come to the conclusion that "Sooc" is a theoretical construct that does not exist in objective reality... Kinda like the "truth"...
I'm quite late to this conversation and the only thing I have to add is that there really is no such thing as SOOC at all. If you shoot jpeg SOOC, it's already been tweaked in camera to look nice to our eye. With variations to exposure, saturation, luminosity, contrast and so on, depending on the setting used, such as Landscape, Portrait, Neutral, Faithful, etc...
I always shoot RAW, so mine are all considered art, by Geoff's parameters above, as they have to be tweaked to bring them back to looking real and then we always want to take them that little bit further so they stand out and give us the eye candy we all crave.
That's not what I would use to define "Art" though.
HDR, if done well can reproduce what the eye sees at sunset. Should we refer to that sort of realism as art rather than photography? I think not. In the not too distant future there are going to be sensors in cameras with this high dynamic range and that will have the same end picture as a subtle HDR merge with current technology.
Having said all that, I consider Photography an Art. OK, now I'm confused, where's the fence again?
@knights
I wouldn't call them "false" – maybe greatly enhanced digitally, or image composite, or heavily processed, or manipulated. But as long as intent is not for documentary purposes (photojournalism) I wouldn't say "false."
Although photoshop etc makes manipulation much easier and varied, manipulation has been going on for years! In-camera effect, using filters, exposure/shutter effects, infrared, forced perspective and whatnot, as well as dodging and burning in the dark room. The wonderful Ansel Adams was an expert at dodging and burning.
Oh, and there is the famous Abraham Lincoln body swap photo, in the 1800's sometime.
I had a dream that I could not be seen or heard by anyone until I had been broughy to life in a dark room. I was not happy with myself so I edited myself in photoshop to tweek a though things. Then I got abused for not being sooc so I thought I would go all out and make myself a full hdr. I woke up confused. Must go to sleep
@northy it is a sweet, rich custard pie... the ingredients are pretty simple, and there are many variations of it. Up north, the closest thing to it is a sugar cream pie.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Get out and shoot, edit or don't, enjoy what you create, and stop worrying about what others do or don't do!
I think some debate is healthy - and I think there are times when photo manipulation is not appropriate (photo journalism for example)... But overall - I'd like to think it is all art...
It's your project, your art...do what makes you happy!!
My favorite book is Piggy Pie !
Photographing a fart is art too ;-)
this thread cracked me up! I needed a laugh
I always shoot RAW, so mine are all considered art, by Geoff's parameters above, as they have to be tweaked to bring them back to looking real and then we always want to take them that little bit further so they stand out and give us the eye candy we all crave.
That's not what I would use to define "Art" though.
HDR, if done well can reproduce what the eye sees at sunset. Should we refer to that sort of realism as art rather than photography? I think not. In the not too distant future there are going to be sensors in cameras with this high dynamic range and that will have the same end picture as a subtle HDR merge with current technology.
Having said all that, I consider Photography an Art. OK, now I'm confused, where's the fence again?
I wouldn't call them "false" – maybe greatly enhanced digitally, or image composite, or heavily processed, or manipulated. But as long as intent is not for documentary purposes (photojournalism) I wouldn't say "false."
Although photoshop etc makes manipulation much easier and varied, manipulation has been going on for years! In-camera effect, using filters, exposure/shutter effects, infrared, forced perspective and whatnot, as well as dodging and burning in the dark room. The wonderful Ansel Adams was an expert at dodging and burning.
Oh, and there is the famous Abraham Lincoln body swap photo, in the 1800's sometime.
@blightygal - i am now picturing Anesel Adams doing the charleston... i don't know why - all that dodging perhaps ;p
@northy Lemon Chess Pie. The best. Here's just one variation. http://allrecipes.com/Recipe/Chess-Pie/
2 eggs
1 1/2 sugar and beat those two ingredients well.
Then mix in 1 t. vanilla, 1/4 cup melted butter, 1 cup Milnot, pinch of salt
After mixed well, pour into unbaked pie shell and bake at 375 for 1 hour or until knife inserted comes out clean.
You can also use a whole can of Milnot and double the rest of the ingredients and make two pies. ;)
Enjoy!!!