If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Photography: Artist vs technician
Hi,
I had a small discussion with some members of my photography club on post-processing. Some thoroughly enjoy PP and come out with superb results. Then there are the likes of me who hate to sit on a computer and work on Photoshop. Everytime I open a photo editor, there is a deep rooted disinterest in doing all the complicated PP. I am also not too much into portraits and *artistic* photography. Prefer lanscapes and architecture more. So here's what I am wondering. Does photography have different sides that attracts people with different leanings? I, for example, work in IT Security. I enjoy machines (all sorts), coding, and hacking. I can at the most identify 5-6 colours. I am attracted to photography because I enjoy producing nice looking photographs and less often some candid portriats. - Siddhartha |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I agreed that photography have different sides that that attracts people
with different leanings. It all depends how you define photography as an ART. I saw some very creative people use PS to edit several pictures and come out the final which doesn't look like a photo. I prefer the traditional way - play with light and get the atmosphere you want to present etc. "Siddhartha Jain" .com... Hi, I had a small discussion with some members of my photography club on post-processing. Some thoroughly enjoy PP and come out with superb results. Then there are the likes of me who hate to sit on a computer and work on Photoshop. Everytime I open a photo editor, there is a deep rooted disinterest in doing all the complicated PP. I am also not too much into portraits and *artistic* photography. Prefer lanscapes and architecture more. So here's what I am wondering. Does photography have different sides that attracts people with different leanings? I, for example, work in IT Security. I enjoy machines (all sorts), coding, and hacking. I can at the most identify 5-6 colours. I am attracted to photography because I enjoy producing nice looking photographs and less often some candid portriats. - Siddhartha |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Cameras wrote: I agreed that photography have different sides that that attracts people with different leanings. It all depends how you define photography as an ART. I saw some very creative people use PS to edit several pictures and come out the final which doesn't look like a photo. I prefer the traditional way - play with light and get the atmosphere you want to present etc. Photography arguably straddles the boundary between art and science. Undeniably it is an art, in that you need the artistic "ability" to recognise and compose a good shot. But there is a technical side to it that can determine whether you are able to capture that vision. I guess some people are attracted to photography as a creative medium, and view fiddling with the dials and software as a means to an end. At the extreme end of that scale are those who take stunning pictures with a pin hole camera, or the Cartier-Bressons who just point and shoot. Equally, I'm sure plenty of people get a kick out of tweaking an image in Photoshop and making a presentable image from a previously uninspiring picture; improving, or rescuing a shot. They are probably also interested (and can quote) the various characteristics of different filmstock, lenses and camera settings. They view the camera as a technical piece of equipment and as much a joy to use, as it is to actually view the pictures afterwards. These are the photographers who will take a meter reading, set the camera manually, bracket and ensure they used the right film for the conditions - or have already switched to digital. I suggest that there is a sliding scale and most of us are somewhere in the middle, attracted by both "painting with light" and the "gadget bag" to different degrees. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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. IT Security. I enjoy machines (all sorts), coding, and hacking. I can at the most identify 5-6 colours. I am attracted to photography because I enjoy producing nice looking photographs and less often some candid portriats. Begin examining your photos more carefully, shoot for colour, tone, contrast, shapes, lines, shaddows, highlights ... etc. and you'll begin to see colour differently. 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. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Siddhartha Jain" wrote
So here's what I am wondering. Does photography have different sides that attracts people with different leanings? IMO this is one of the more interesting observations I've read in this group. And the answer is yes. My collection of friends who are very into photography come from all different backgrounds and each of them has their own expressive style - some would even say that they don't have an expressive style because saying things like that sound artzy to them and they don't want to be considered artzy. -- Mark Photos, Ideas & Opinions http://www.marklauter.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I've been a professional photographer since 1966. Only when I discovered
Adobe Photoshop did I truly feel I was creating my best possible images. I feel I am now a complete artist ... capturing the image and then completing it in Photoshop. It is a lot more rewarding than just sending my work to the color lab. Craig Flory |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On 8 Jun 2005 04:03:24 -0700, in rec.photo.digital , "Chadwick"
in .com wrote: Cameras wrote: I agreed that photography have different sides that that attracts people with different leanings. It all depends how you define photography as an ART. I saw some very creative people use PS to edit several pictures and come out the final which doesn't look like a photo. I prefer the traditional way - play with light and get the atmosphere you want to present etc. Photography arguably straddles the boundary between art and science. Undeniably it is an art, in that you need the artistic "ability" to recognise and compose a good shot. But there is a technical side to it that can determine whether you are able to capture that vision. How does that differ from, say, painting or sculpture or weaving? [snip] -- Matt Silberstein All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus, there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On 8 Jun 2005 00:16:41 -0700, in rec.photo.digital , "Siddhartha Jain"
in .com wrote: Hi, I had a small discussion with some members of my photography club on post-processing. Some thoroughly enjoy PP and come out with superb results. Then there are the likes of me who hate to sit on a computer and work on Photoshop. Everytime I open a photo editor, there is a deep rooted disinterest in doing all the complicated PP. I am also not too much into portraits and *artistic* photography. Prefer lanscapes and architecture more. I wonder if someone, starting perhaps with an Adams, might consider landscape photography an opportunity for *artistic* (even *ARTISTIC*) expression. So here's what I am wondering. Does photography have different sides that attracts people with different leanings? I, for example, work in IT Security. I enjoy machines (all sorts), coding, and hacking. I can at the most identify 5-6 colours. Say what? This is a form of color blindness I am not familiar with. Either that or you are making a comment about the non-existence of indigo. I am attracted to photography because I enjoy producing nice looking photographs and less often some candid portriats. Can you tell the difference between saturated and washed out color? -- Matt Silberstein All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus, there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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. IT Security. I enjoy machines (all sorts), coding, and hacking. I can at the most identify 5-6 colours. I am attracted to photography because I enjoy producing nice looking photographs and less often some candid portriats. Begin examining your photos more carefully, shoot for colour, tone, contrast, shapes, lines, shaddows, highlights ... etc. and you'll begin to see colour differently. 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. It pleases me not. Breaks _that_ rule, for me. Do you remember a thread about "The genre of photography you like least"? I thought there were some fine insights there. -- Frank ess |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Frank ess wrote:
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. IT Security. I enjoy machines (all sorts), coding, and hacking. I can at the most identify 5-6 colours. I am attracted to photography because I enjoy producing nice looking photographs and less often some candid portriats. Begin examining your photos more carefully, shoot for colour, tone, contrast, shapes, lines, shaddows, highlights ... etc. and you'll begin to see colour differently. 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. It pleases me not. Breaks _that_ rule, for me. Do you remember a thread about "The genre of photography you like least"? I thought there were some fine insights there. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...99ba123ab69e6d or http://tinyurl.com/9ztdv -- Frank ess |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Books on Composition, developing an "Eye"? | William J. Slater | General Photography Techniques | 9 | April 7th 04 04:22 PM |
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash | elchief | In The Darkroom | 3 | April 7th 04 10:20 AM |
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash | John | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | April 7th 04 05:33 AM |
Study Photography in Venice | Venice School of Photography | General Photography Techniques | 0 | February 13th 04 06:17 PM |
Aerial Photography from Alaska, Yukon Territory & beyond | PNW | Photographing Nature | 0 | December 1st 03 11:19 AM |