Check out this terrific piece that Darwin posted on his blog today and give the challenge at the end a try. I have a feeling a lot of people are going to be very, very surprised at the end of the day.
I also thank you for the link. A very interesting discussion. I agree with both Darwin and your conclusion - Photography is an interpretation. It must "look and feel" natural but it certainly is not a true one for one recording of the exact scene.
When photographers and our audience finally realizes and accepts this our art form will have matured to adult hood!
Posted by Kent Staubus on June 16, 2009 at 9:50 AM
For me, the best lines were, "Photography is not a replication of what the human eye sees. And my view of the world is different than yours–all of photography is subjective. What is real? And by whose standards? The sooner we accept that photography is an interpretation, the easier it will be to accept interpretative techniques. " I totally agree.
For me, the best lines were, "Photography is not a replication of what the human eye sees. And my view of the world is different than yours–all of photography is subjective. What is real? And by whose standards? The sooner we accept that photography is an interpretation, the easier it will be to accept interpretative techniques. " I totally agree.
Thank you everyone. I have had a problem with this. Is photography to be "exactly as seen" or an expression of the individual photographer? Even the film changes it some. I did only minor darkroom work as a teenager and was amazed how even the choice of paper changed the image... plus burning, dodging etc. Then there are all the filters one can use!!!
Photoshop does unbelievable things. Is photography of today just a collecting of images "as seen" or the artist's rendition of the scene? We are artists, not documentarists! My only wish is that if steps were taken in enhancement... acknowledge, share so we all can see and learn. Don't try to pass it off as "just as seen" Accept the artistic side of photography as valid.
I think my answer will not be well taken, but here goes...
Does this include all the galleries and that any thing goes, as long as the photographer can create the image he/she wants the rest to see? Does this mean the NPN site is no longer just a nature photographers site? Is it now to be known as a photography site where manipulation is across the board?
I have changed clouds in a landscape, for my own pleasure, not here. I have changed heads on people... why not animals, birds? Some of the colors are so saturated! Yet... when people were commenting about a member's image on a photo magazine cover, the first comment was about the over saturation and how it did not seem right. It was then mentioned that the original was not that way. They expected reality to be present and then said... well the magazine wanted the image to pop out. I guess that is what is desired here on NPN. When I first came onboard, what I see in some galleries, was moved immediately to PhotoArt by the moderators!
The skills people have gained in using software such as Photoshop is amazing. It is a skill just like photography. That is fine and good... but I feel that the photographers need to be open about what they have done, added, etc to create their image. It could be very misleading to someone starting out to come here and wonder why they can't take photos like the ones seen on the site. Of course, it would not take long for them to learn just how much is done in the 'digital darkroom'
Anyway.. these are my thoughts and reactions... we all have our own and are free to express them. That is what is great about being in the USA!
Posted by David Bostedo on June 25, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Agreed Barbara - while a photo can't EXACTLY replicate reality, there is some assumption of being true to what could actually have been seen, or what was actually there. How much manipulation/alteration it takes to change an image from a nature photo to something else is, of course, highly debatable. Between the guidelines on the site, and the Photo Art gallery, there have been some lines drawn here, but they are flexible.
Discussion
7 replieshttp://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/06/15/rant-hdr/
Lon
When photographers and our audience finally realizes and accepts this our art form will have matured to adult hood!
Kent in SD
Thank you everyone. I have had a problem with this. Is photography to be "exactly as seen" or an expression of the individual photographer? Even the film changes it some. I did only minor darkroom work as a teenager and was amazed how even the choice of paper changed the image... plus burning, dodging etc. Then there are all the filters one can use!!!
Photoshop does unbelievable things. Is photography of today just a collecting of images "as seen" or the artist's rendition of the scene? We are artists, not documentarists! My only wish is that if steps were taken in enhancement... acknowledge, share so we all can see and learn. Don't try to pass it off as "just as seen" Accept the artistic side of photography as valid.
Yes.
We are showing what we can show not what we saw.
Pete D.
I think my answer will not be well taken, but here goes...
Does this include all the galleries and that any thing goes, as long as the photographer can create the image he/she wants the rest to see? Does this mean the NPN site is no longer just a nature photographers site? Is it now to be known as a photography site where manipulation is across the board?
I have changed clouds in a landscape, for my own pleasure, not here. I have changed heads on people... why not animals, birds? Some of the colors are so saturated! Yet... when people were commenting about a member's image on a photo magazine cover, the first comment was about the over saturation and how it did not seem right. It was then mentioned that the original was not that way. They expected reality to be present and then said... well the magazine wanted the image to pop out. I guess that is what is desired here on NPN. When I first came onboard, what I see in some galleries, was moved immediately to PhotoArt by the moderators!
The skills people have gained in using software such as Photoshop is amazing. It is a skill just like photography. That is fine and good... but I feel that the photographers need to be open about what they have done, added, etc to create their image. It could be very misleading to someone starting out to come here and wonder why they can't take photos like the ones seen on the site. Of course, it would not take long for them to learn just how much is done in the 'digital darkroom'
Anyway.. these are my thoughts and reactions... we all have our own and are free to express them. That is what is great about being in the USA!