I wonder if there aren't multiple understandings of what it means for a photo to be "photoshopped"? One as in adjusting color, dodging and burning just as you would in a dark room. Either to the extent you might find with more realistic (for lack of a better term) photos or done in a heavy handed manner. But even when heavy handed, not changing the structure of the image.
Then there's the "photoshopped" as a derogatory, fake or false image, where you cut and paste, add and remove, perform greater manipulation than would be possible without a sharp pair of scissors and a glue stick in the dark room with you. Such as the idea that the steam could have added in Mike's photo rather than be original to the image.
I wonder if there aren't multiple understandings of what it means for a photo to be "photoshopped"? One as in adjusting color, dodging and burning just as you would in a dark room. Either to the extent you might find with more realistic (for lack of a better term) photos or done in a heavy handed manner. But even when heavy handed, not changing the structure of the image.
Then there's the "photoshopped" as a derogatory, fake or false image, where you cut and paste, add and remove, perform greater manipulation than would be possible without a sharp pair of scissors and a glue stick in the dark room with you. Such as the idea that the steam could have added in Mike's photo rather than be original to the image.
Just rambling out loud. :lurk
I appreciate it all.
Take this photo for instance. Doesn't matter if it was color or B&W it still happened, I happened to crop square. What if I used my Leica that has a 1:1 ratio option instead of my Nikon or I had my Leica set to 16:9 ? My vision was still the same. The higher contrast was done in Adobe RAW and only entered Photoshop to be toned and resized 10" x 10". The photographs name is "Urban Camouflage" because that's what I saw. Does it matter if I used a higher contrast than other photographers ? Does it matter that I warm tone my images ? Does it matter that I crop square ? Does it matter that some times I add grain ? Gee you can't do that in the dark room can you ?
... Does it matter if I used a higher contrast than other photographers ? Does it matter that I warm tone my images ? Does it matter that I crop square ? Does it matter that some times I add grain ? Gee you can't do that in the dark room can you ?
Does it matter that someone questioned you photography?
The truth is, for every thumbs up you get you'll get 10 or 20 or 100 thumbs down. This is true for you, me (my average is probably much lower than that), HCB, Ansel Adams and DaVinci. In this forum, especially, we should expect to be questioned first and like later as the majority of us are here to learn from, and hopefully teach, one another. If we cannot take criticism, or discuss our trade, then what's the point? We could just go look at photography on flickr.
But then I see photography as the truthful rendering of what is, rather than as the rendering of what I might imagine.
Yes, here is the core issue. You take a documentary approach to street photography while others are more concerned with purely visual creation. There is art in both approaches and one can also produce crap either way. There is also a huge middle ground, which is where many of us find ourselves. But IMO, neither side has the exclusive rights to the term "street," much less "photography."
Does it matter that someone questioned you photography?
The truth is, for every thumbs up you get you'll get 10 or 20 or 100 thumbs down. This is true for you, me (my average is probably much lower than that), HCB, Ansel Adams and DaVinci. In this forum, especially, we should expect to be questioned first and like later as the majority of us are here to learn from, and hopefully teach, one another. If we cannot take criticism, or discuss our trade, then what's the point? We could just go look at photography on flickr.
No it doesn't matter and I haven't and don't take offense to any criticism.
Comments
Then there's the "photoshopped" as a derogatory, fake or false image, where you cut and paste, add and remove, perform greater manipulation than would be possible without a sharp pair of scissors and a glue stick in the dark room with you. Such as the idea that the steam could have added in Mike's photo rather than be original to the image.
Just rambling out loud. :lurk
I appreciate it all.
not life but lifelike
Take this photo for instance. Doesn't matter if it was color or B&W it still happened, I happened to crop square. What if I used my Leica that has a 1:1 ratio option instead of my Nikon or I had my Leica set to 16:9 ? My vision was still the same. The higher contrast was done in Adobe RAW and only entered Photoshop to be toned and resized 10" x 10". The photographs name is "Urban Camouflage" because that's what I saw. Does it matter if I used a higher contrast than other photographers ? Does it matter that I warm tone my images ? Does it matter that I crop square ? Does it matter that some times I add grain ? Gee you can't do that in the dark room can you ?
The truth is, for every thumbs up you get you'll get 10 or 20 or 100 thumbs down. This is true for you, me (my average is probably much lower than that), HCB, Ansel Adams and DaVinci. In this forum, especially, we should expect to be questioned first and like later as the majority of us are here to learn from, and hopefully teach, one another. If we cannot take criticism, or discuss our trade, then what's the point? We could just go look at photography on flickr.
No it doesn't matter and I haven't and don't take offense to any criticism.