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
|
|||
|
|||
Real feelings about fake images
For over 20 years I have enjoyed traditional photography, both color and
b/w. I have also printed in both a color and a b/w darkroom for the past 15 years. The only print manipulation I perform is selective dodging, burning, and cropping. It seems that lately some viewers are questioning the "reality" of my work. I am often asked; "Oh, did you create that image in Photoshop?". My images are true to life....just as I saw them with my own eyes at the time of exposure. I get upset when viewers suspect that my work is "made up" or is "not real". I am beginning to lose the excitement and joy that my photography has given me over the years. I just do not feel inspired to seek out great scenes to photograph when it is now possible to just create an artifical scene on a computer. Does anyone else feel this way...or am I just too sensitive for my own good? Terry |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Terry Davis" wrote in message
... For over 20 years I have enjoyed traditional photography, both color and b/w. I have also printed in both a color and a b/w darkroom for the past 15 years. The only print manipulation I perform is selective dodging, burning, and cropping. It seems that lately some viewers are questioning the "reality" of my work. I am often asked; "Oh, did you create that image in Photoshop?". I was astonished the first time a sophisticated person published one of my photos calling it a "Merged, maniuplated print." It was a straight, conventional print. My images are true to life....just as I saw them with my own eyes at the time of exposure. I get upset when viewers suspect that my work is "made up" or is "not real". Consider it a sign of the times and be encouraged rather than discouraged. When interests drift into what's genuine and what is not, you will have evidence for the former. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Terry Davis" wrote in message ... For over 20 years I have enjoyed traditional photography, both color and b/w. I have also printed in both a color and a b/w darkroom for the past 15 years. The only print manipulation I perform is selective dodging, burning, and cropping. It seems that lately some viewers are questioning the "reality" of my work. I am often asked; "Oh, did you create that image in Photoshop?". My images are true to life....just as I saw them with my own eyes at the time of exposure. I get upset when viewers suspect that my work is "made up" or is "not real". I am beginning to lose the excitement and joy that my photography has given me over the years. I just do not feel inspired to seek out great scenes to photograph when it is now possible to just create an artifical scene on a computer. Does anyone else feel this way...or am I just too sensitive for my own good? Terry No! I feel just the opposite. I am inspired to produce even better traditional prints especially as my last few prints were sold to individual collectors searching for non-electronic photographs. Truly, dr bob. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Terry Davis" wrote in message ... For over 20 years I have enjoyed traditional photography, both color and b/w. I have also printed in both a color and a b/w darkroom for the past 15 years. The only print manipulation I perform is selective dodging, burning, and cropping. It seems that lately some viewers are questioning the "reality" of my work. I am often asked; "Oh, did you create that image in Photoshop?". My images are true to life....just as I saw them with my own eyes at the time of exposure. I get upset when viewers suspect that my work is "made up" or is "not real". I am beginning to lose the excitement and joy that my photography has given me over the years. I just do not feel inspired to seek out great scenes to photograph when it is now possible to just create an artifical scene on a computer. Does anyone else feel this way...or am I just too sensitive for my own good? Terry No! I feel just the opposite. I am inspired to produce even better traditional prints especially as my last few prints were sold to individual collectors searching for non-electronic photographs. Truly, dr bob. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I'll agree with this (bottom) poster. I have spent the last 30 years of my
life working with information systems, and quite a few with digital image manipulation techniques - usually "making art" or wallpaper for websites, not manipulating images. I really dislike working with images in a digital darkroom. Not that it's "immoral" or "not real art" or anything, I just don't like those tools anymore than I like to cook with a blowtorch. I love the challenges and opportunities posed by the limitations of a chemical developing process, and as long as there is B&W film, I'll do the chemical darkroom. I think the rub is that non-photographers don't seem to appreciate the work that goes into making a good straight print, and tend to view the artist's talent exclusively as a function of the complexity of the image. The more complex and manipulated, the better the artist. I wonder how they would feel about Ansel Adams who labored mightily over his "straight" landscapes. While to the casual eye they may appear essentially unmanipulated, his abilities to eventually find his way to the print he intended and his ability to frame the image at the right moment make him one of the truly great artists. But I wonder if he will still be appreciated when we are a few generations removed from the film camera? The ease of digital imaging does not appeal to me, and frankly that's all that should matter. I tend to print full frame 35mm, 4x5, and panoramics on the theory that I should include all (and only) the necessary information in the frame when I trip the shutter. I work at filtration and exposure to capture the image I have in mind. I manipulate the print to get to that image too. For me photography is about challenging myself. If I did it for money, I'd have to go digital to compete. But I can waste countless sheets of paper, rolls of film, and hours of labor, ultimately producing 1 good print just because I have learned something from the experience and just because I know that those who have spent time in a darkroom will appreciate the effort as much as I appreciate their efforts. I have a professional (maybe ex-professional now) photogapher friend who will no longer look at B&W photo magazines because (in his words) "all the worthy pictures have already been taken." To carry this bizarre notion into the digital world, we should no bother to take any pictures because if it hasn't been shot yet, (or we missed an historic picture opportunity), we could just fabricate what we imagine it was like digitally. We "filmers" have the satisfaction of knowing we have the skill and the luck to be in the right place at the right time to capture in an image a tiny slice of reality rather than (potentially) fabricate it out of thin air. That makes me want to work harder at my craft. I do label all my prints with the camera, film, and paper to be sure that the viewer has the ability to understand that this print resulted from a chemical rather than digital process. "dr bob" wrote in message ... "Terry Davis" wrote in message ... For over 20 years I have enjoyed traditional photography, both color and b/w. I have also printed in both a color and a b/w darkroom for the past 15 years. The only print manipulation I perform is selective dodging, burning, and cropping. It seems that lately some viewers are questioning the "reality" of my work. I am often asked; "Oh, did you create that image in Photoshop?". My images are true to life....just as I saw them with my own eyes at the time of exposure. I get upset when viewers suspect that my work is "made up" or is "not real". I am beginning to lose the excitement and joy that my photography has given me over the years. I just do not feel inspired to seek out great scenes to photograph when it is now possible to just create an artifical scene on a computer. Does anyone else feel this way...or am I just too sensitive for my own good? Terry No! I feel just the opposite. I am inspired to produce even better traditional prints especially as my last few prints were sold to individual collectors searching for non-electronic photographs. Truly, dr bob. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I'll agree with this (bottom) poster. I have spent the last 30 years of my
life working with information systems, and quite a few with digital image manipulation techniques - usually "making art" or wallpaper for websites, not manipulating images. I really dislike working with images in a digital darkroom. Not that it's "immoral" or "not real art" or anything, I just don't like those tools anymore than I like to cook with a blowtorch. I love the challenges and opportunities posed by the limitations of a chemical developing process, and as long as there is B&W film, I'll do the chemical darkroom. I think the rub is that non-photographers don't seem to appreciate the work that goes into making a good straight print, and tend to view the artist's talent exclusively as a function of the complexity of the image. The more complex and manipulated, the better the artist. I wonder how they would feel about Ansel Adams who labored mightily over his "straight" landscapes. While to the casual eye they may appear essentially unmanipulated, his abilities to eventually find his way to the print he intended and his ability to frame the image at the right moment make him one of the truly great artists. But I wonder if he will still be appreciated when we are a few generations removed from the film camera? The ease of digital imaging does not appeal to me, and frankly that's all that should matter. I tend to print full frame 35mm, 4x5, and panoramics on the theory that I should include all (and only) the necessary information in the frame when I trip the shutter. I work at filtration and exposure to capture the image I have in mind. I manipulate the print to get to that image too. For me photography is about challenging myself. If I did it for money, I'd have to go digital to compete. But I can waste countless sheets of paper, rolls of film, and hours of labor, ultimately producing 1 good print just because I have learned something from the experience and just because I know that those who have spent time in a darkroom will appreciate the effort as much as I appreciate their efforts. I have a professional (maybe ex-professional now) photogapher friend who will no longer look at B&W photo magazines because (in his words) "all the worthy pictures have already been taken." To carry this bizarre notion into the digital world, we should no bother to take any pictures because if it hasn't been shot yet, (or we missed an historic picture opportunity), we could just fabricate what we imagine it was like digitally. We "filmers" have the satisfaction of knowing we have the skill and the luck to be in the right place at the right time to capture in an image a tiny slice of reality rather than (potentially) fabricate it out of thin air. That makes me want to work harder at my craft. I do label all my prints with the camera, film, and paper to be sure that the viewer has the ability to understand that this print resulted from a chemical rather than digital process. "dr bob" wrote in message ... "Terry Davis" wrote in message ... For over 20 years I have enjoyed traditional photography, both color and b/w. I have also printed in both a color and a b/w darkroom for the past 15 years. The only print manipulation I perform is selective dodging, burning, and cropping. It seems that lately some viewers are questioning the "reality" of my work. I am often asked; "Oh, did you create that image in Photoshop?". My images are true to life....just as I saw them with my own eyes at the time of exposure. I get upset when viewers suspect that my work is "made up" or is "not real". I am beginning to lose the excitement and joy that my photography has given me over the years. I just do not feel inspired to seek out great scenes to photograph when it is now possible to just create an artifical scene on a computer. Does anyone else feel this way...or am I just too sensitive for my own good? Terry No! I feel just the opposite. I am inspired to produce even better traditional prints especially as my last few prints were sold to individual collectors searching for non-electronic photographs. Truly, dr bob. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
It's a very frustrating attitude to have to deal with. People who have to
ask if an image has been Photoshopped, to me, don't understand much about photography and aren't worth engaging in conversation about anything photo- related. My answer to the question as to whether one of my images has been PSed is, "Who cares?" If it is indeed the questioner who does care, thank them for their time and walk away. Christopher Swift www.hotchilistudios.com -- Message posted via http://www.photokb.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
It's a very frustrating attitude to have to deal with. People who have to
ask if an image has been Photoshopped, to me, don't understand much about photography and aren't worth engaging in conversation about anything photo- related. My answer to the question as to whether one of my images has been PSed is, "Who cares?" If it is indeed the questioner who does care, thank them for their time and walk away. Christopher Swift www.hotchilistudios.com -- Message posted via http://www.photokb.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Call for Entries - Undewater Images Photo-Video Competition | Mark | Digital Photography | 55 | January 4th 05 06:03 AM |
Scanning Film Images into Digital Files | Michael | Digital Photography | 21 | September 18th 04 09:47 PM |
10d soft images | Giorgio Preddio | Digital Photography | 47 | July 1st 04 02:51 PM |
10d soft images | Giorgio Preddio | 35mm Photo Equipment | 47 | July 1st 04 02:51 PM |
Lost Your Digital Pictures? Recover Them - Are you a professional photographer w corrupt digital images, an end user with missing photos? | eProvided.com | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 5th 03 06:47 PM |