Alan Browne wrote:
Siddhartha Jain wrote:


rooted disinterest in doing all the complicated PP. I am also not too
much into portraits and *artistic* photography. Prefer lanscapes and
architecture more.


The photo editor can be applied to prepare a mostly unchanged photo for
printing (cropping, levels, resize, USM) or to transform the image
completely and merge with other images. It's the end result that
counts, not the steps in the middle. Do it as rich or lean as you like.


So here's what I am wondering. Does photography have different sides
that attracts people with different leanings? I, for example, work in


Of course. People are drawn to photography for thousands of varying
reasons.

There are 3,893 reasons so far documented.

One of the recent shootin shots:
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/43718075
is an example where colour takes on a major role in making this a very
pleasing image.

This points to a Tom Hudson image in the "Breaking the Rules" mandate of
the Shoot In, where half the image is very out of focus, and the colors
pastel. Did you mean to point to your image in the same gallery, where
the colors are way more pleasing??

--
John McWilliams