By the 1960s, Adams’ energetic work on behalf of photography and the environment began to supersede his own creative work.
Experiments with new techniques and materialsled him to make diverse types of imagery, and he produced fewer of the iconic landscapes for which he was best known. As demand for his older work increased, Adams began to print many of his earlier images in a more graphic style, using dramatic tonal contrasts to recast his original vision.
You're only as good as your next photo....
One day, I started writing, not knowing that I had chained myself for life to a noble but merciless master. When God hands you a gift, he also hands you a whip; and the whip is intended solely for self-flagellation...I'm here alone in my dark madness, all by myself with my deck of cards --- and, of course, the whip God gave me." Truman Capote
By the 1960s, Adams’ energetic work on behalf of photography and the environment began to supersede his own creative work.
Experiments with new techniques and materialsled him to make diverse types of imagery, and he produced fewer of the iconic landscapes for which he was best known. As demand for his older work increased, Adams began to print many of his earlier images in a more graphic style, using dramatic tonal contrasts to recast his original vision.
Had Ansel lived long enough I'm sure he would have owned a copy of Photoshop -he really cared more about the final image than about how he got to it. As technology changed Ansel changed with it -which I think says a lot about the creative genius of the man.
But, for the record, the Ansel Adams Excuse is weak, in that it ignores the simple fact that he had excellent images before he went into post processing. He used the dark room to add his own style to an image, he didn't use it as a crutch to compensate for poor technique. IMHO the vast majority of people I see posting images on the web don't use post processing as a tool, they abuse it to make up for a lack of skill with the camera...
I see nothing wrong with post processing -I'd be a hypocrite if I did! As a macro photographer I have to post process my images: I can never eliminate the dust on my sensor (so spots always show) and I have to shoot RAW to get the most detail possible. But I call myself a photographer because I go out of my way to get the image right with the camera: Exposure, composition, etc. The only thing I'm doing in post is "developing the negative" -even Ansel did more post processing than I do now.
As for this contest: I really don't care about the level of post processing. From the beginning it has been a contest about the final image because the rules have been too open. But I'll never take many of the contestants seriously as photographers because they wouldn't be able to compete without a computer. To call someone who relies on post processing to produce an image a photographer is the same as calling me a mechanic just because I'm holding a wrench -and if you knew just how mechanically declined I am that comparison would make sense to you. People run away in fear when they see me with tools...
***I may take a beating for this one, but I think it's funny how being a graphic artist is like being gay. It's OK to admit you're a graphic artist -really it is! There's no need to stay in the closet and call yourselves photographers...
*** Notice the laughing emoticon -that last comment was meant as a joke and I don't want anyone to take it seriously
I am very uneasy with the idea that you judge someone as a photographer or not a photographer. Anyone who uses a camera will sometimes take good pictures. Anyone who uses a camera will also sometimes take bad pictures. Then there is the guy at the mall studio who presses the button and gets the same technically fine but bland shot 100 times a week. How do you draw the line?
I am very uneasy with the idea that you judge someone as a photographer or not a photographer. Anyone who uses a camera will sometimes take good pictures. Anyone who uses a camera will also sometimes take bad pictures.
Yup -I delete a lot of photos. I once read that the difference between a pro and an armature is a pro deletes more images
Then there is the guy at the mall studio who presses the button and gets the same technically fine but bland shot 100 times a week. How do you draw the line?
You're not making a distinction between good photographers and bad ones. Anybody can put a pan on the fire, but not everyone can make a great tasting omlet...
You're not making a distinction between good photographers and bad ones. Anybody can put a pan on the fire, but not everyone can make a great tasting omlet...
The vast majority of real world professional photography is not about creating art. It is about creating functional images which satisfy the needs of a customer. Is it fair to call someone who regulary sends his clients home satisfied a bad photographer? Maybe a better term is a good enough photographer.
The vast majority of real world professional photography is not about creating art. It is about creating functional images which satisfy the needs of a customer. Is it fair to call someone who regulary sends his clients home satisfied a bad photographer? Maybe a better term is a good enough photographer.
How about calling that person a graphic artist because the primary tool of their trade is a computer and not a camera?...
I've said it before: Calling someone a photographer just because they use a camera is the same as calling someone a mechanic just because you see them holding a wrench -it's a conclusion drawn by a superficial observation. I might be using that wrench to hammer a nail, or pry up the cover on a bucket of paint...
A lot of painters draw an image on canvas before they pick up a brush -the drawing gives them an outline of what they are going to paint later on. I see a lot of graphic artist using a camera for the same task; to draw an image before they paint it on the computer. But just because they use a camera instead of a pencil that doesn't mean that they are photographers.
I draw the line this way: If you are more concerned about all of the things that make a difference before you press the shutter release then you're a photographer. If you really don't care about what the camera captures because you're just going to change the image once you get it on the computer then you're a graphic artist. There are some, and I'd include Ansel in this category (and to a much lesser extent myself), who use both a camera and post processing to produce an image. How I take a photo is sometimes influenced by what I'm going to do to it later. IE: Under expose because I know the colors will saturate (digital is just like color positive slide film) and I can raise the exposure back up in post if I have to. Compose for a portrait even though I'm holding the camera horizontally because I'm going to turn it 90 degrees on the computer and sometimes holding the camera for a landscape, but framing for a portrait, is easier than turning the camera. Minor examples but I think you get the point. There are some who bracket their shots and then use HDR techniques to blend the best of each exposure and I consider that photography if the person nailed the composition with the view finder...
How about calling that person a graphic artist because the primary tool of their trade is a computer and not a camera?...
Here's a couple examples of what I am talking about:
Let's I am shooting catalog shots and I have 1000 items to shoot on a white seamless and 4 days to get the job done. My end product is a DVD full of RAW files plus a color checker shot under the same light which I send to the photo editor responsible for putting the catalog together.
Let's say I am shooting portraits of underclassmen for the high school yearbook and I have to crank out 350 portraits a day all shot against the same blue background. I have 5 minutes per student so I don't have time to fiddle with lights. I setup a pair of umbrellas which give me flat so the portrait will look decent no matter how the subject is posed and fire away for the next 8 hours.
Neither of these people is creating art. Neither of them is using a computer for anything more that data storage and previewing images. The are thinking about what makes a difference, but cost and time is as much a part of their equation as quality. The pictures have to be good enough out of camera processed automatically because custom retouching work in Photoshop is too expensive. They are, however, making a living with a camera.
Health Warning - Opinionated Text Follows
I've been away for a while and have just come back and read through this debate several times. On one level it's quite funny and on another level quite sad.
On the funny side - when I play a sport, rugby for instance, I go into the game knowing the rules and abide by them as much as I can (rugby tends to ring the worst out in me sometimes which is why we have referees!). The rules are there to guide me as a player, and to help me enjoy playing the game. If, for example, I didn't think players should be able to touch the ball with their hands, well, then I'd go and find another game to play, maybe baseball or soccer. Just like sports, I think the same way about this competition, there are rules laid down and I choose to abide by them. If I didn't like the rules, I'd look to see if there was another competition around that had rules that I liked.
On the sad side - living in Asia for the 21 years and especially the last 3 years in the Philippines has taught me a lot about values and things that I should really care about. Here the majority of people care about one thing - getting one solid meal a day in the stomachs. Everyday I am reminded not to get too caught up in small issues and not to let small things bother me, but rather to focus on the bigger issues. To put it bluntly, the issues being debated here seem trivial in the larger scheme of things.
What am I trying to say? You joined the competition, you read the rules. Enjoy playing within the rules as you see fit, but just because someone plays the same game differently, but still within rules, does not make them wrong.
Changes to the rules are possible, but it should be done with great thought and with a clear reason, not just because a couple of people don't like them.
You realize that your own entry for SF3 violiated this rule? Merge to HDR is a compositing technique.
Actually no, there's nothing in my image that wasn't there when I released the shutter, but that's a whole can of worms that should probably be left alone.
Maybe I'm not expressing the distinction I'm making very well, apologies for that.
Here's a couple examples of what I am talking about:
Let's I am shooting catalog shots and I have 1000 items to shoot on a white seamless and 4 days to get the job done. My end product is a DVD full of RAW files plus a color checker shot under the same light which I send to the photo editor responsible for putting the catalog together.
Let's say I am shooting portraits of underclassmen for the high school yearbook and I have to crank out 350 portraits a day all shot against the same blue background. I have 5 minutes per student so I don't have time to fiddle with lights. I setup a pair of umbrellas which give me flat so the portrait will look decent no matter how the subject is posed and fire away for the next 8 hours.
Neither of these people is creating art. Neither of them is using a computer for anything more that data storage and previewing images. The are thinking about what makes a difference, but cost and time is as much a part of their equation as quality. The pictures have to be good enough out of camera processed automatically because custom retouching work in Photoshop is too expensive. They are, however, making a living with a camera.
In both cases the primary tool is a camera, so they are both photographers. Is either of them good, or artists? That would be up to the general public to decide. You're still not making a distinction between good and bad photographers -instead you want to call everyone who uses a camera a photographer. I also don't think that you are making a distinction between photography and art...
There are a lot of cooks on the planet, but as a percentage of the population there are very few chefs. Likewise there are a lot of photographers and graphic artists, but how much of what they produce is really art?...
What am I trying to say? You joined the competition, you read the rules. Enjoy playing within the rules as you see fit, but just because someone plays the same game differently, but still within rules, does not make them wrong.
You brought up a really good point. I'm not trying to say that anyone is right or wrong -again the rules make this competition wide open. From the very first qualifying rounds it was clear that there was going to be a lot of heavy post processing -so much that my wife told me I was crazy for entering.
There is also nothing wrong with post processing. If it's a part of your style, if it's what you use to make your work unique, then why not! In photography, were technique is concerned, there are is no black and white -only varying shades of gray.
But I wouldn't call someone a photographer if their primary tool for creating an image is a computer because that, IMHO, is the definition of a graphic artist. If you can't nail the composition with the viewfinder, if you can't at least get reasonably close to the correct exposure, if you don't understand how the quality of the light effects the color and contrast in your images (and how to take advantage of the light you have) then I'm not going to take you seriously as a photographer. Sorry, but you would have nothing to teach me -and I'm still learning...
To put my images where my mouth is I offer this one sample of many. A shot of an ant at five times life size. Very minimal editing, and I composed the scene with the view finder -kinda hard to reach for the cropping tool when my blog is called "No Cropping Zone"
FWIW this image is only 4.5 millimeters wide...
If I can take an image like that then anyone can -I'm not special...
You brought up a really good point. I'm not trying to say that anyone is right or wrong -again the rules make this competition wide open. From the very first qualifying rounds it was clear that there was going to be a lot of heavy post processing -so much that my wife told me I was crazy for entering.
There is also nothing wrong with post processing. If it's a part of your style, if it's what you use to make your work unique, then why not! In photography, were technique is concerned, there are is no black and white -only varying shades of grey.
But I wouldn't call someone a photographer if their primary tool for creating an image is a computer because that, IMHO, is the definition of a graphic artist.
If you can't nail the composition with the viewfinder, if you can't at least get reasonably close to the correct exposure,
if you don't understand how the quality of the light affects the colour and contrast in your images (and how to take advantage of the light you have) then I'm not going to take you seriously as a photographer.
Again I agree with you 100%. Funny thing is, if you look at the explanations from this thread, most of the original shots did nail the composition, light and contrast in all the composite images. Yes, there are some affects added, but by your own definition, in the composite images they are all taken by photographers - BUT the final image is put together by a "photographical artist". In my mind this makes them excellent people to learn from both from a photography point of view (original images) and a graphic artist point of view (final composite).
Sorry, but you would have nothing to teach me -and I'm still learning...
Out of all the statements this makes me the saddest, because no matter how good you are, you can still always learn something. In fact the best way of learning is to teach, so maybe by helping those of us who are of lesser capabilities it will ultimately benefit yourself.
I'm definitely not in the same level as yourself and can say I have nothing to teach anyone in this competition - that's why I joined - but by sharing what I have learned with others around me, I reinforce my learning’s.
To put my images where my mouth is I offer this one sample of many. A shot of an ant at five times life size. Very minimal editing, and I composed the scene with the view finder -kinda hard to reach for the cropping tool when my blog is called "No Cropping Zone"
FWIW this image is only 4.5 millimeters wide...
If I can take an image like that then anyone can -I'm not special...
Your images never cease to amaze me and each time a competition is run I always look forward to seeing your entry. You are definitely a very talented individual who has mastered the art of macro photography. I read your blogs and enjoy learning from you.
In return, please don't judge me, or others, for trying to become as good as you (or maybe even better one day) by entering this competition and competing with the skill level we have and tools that are available to us. Help us learn to do more with the camera and less with tools, by commenting on how to improve our images from within the camera.
And if we do make a composite image, judge us based on our photography skills of the original images AND our graphic artist skills of the final image, not just on the fact that we took time to stick some images together.
Finally let me say that from your blogs, images and comments in these threads you are obviously passionate about some areas of photography, which I find inspirational, but don't be surprised if others don’t share your passions or have other passions. In the end we all may just have to agree to disagree
Out of all the statements this makes me the saddest, because no matter how good you are, you can still always learn something. In fact the best way of learning is to teach, so maybe by helping those of us who are of lesser capabilities it will ultimately benefit yourself.
Let me say it a different way: Someone who does not understand all of the things that you need to pay attention to before you press the shutter release has nothing to teach me. That's not to say that I don't need schoolin' -far from it! But I want to learn from people who, IMHO, are photographers and not graphic artists. I want to learn how to capture the light with a camera, and not draw it on a computer...
I'm definitely not in the same level as yourself and can say I have nothing to teach anyone in this competition - that's why I joined - but by sharing what I have learned with others around me, I reinforce my learning’s.
I disagree because I learn from just about everyone...
Your images never cease to amaze me and each time a competition is run I always look forward to seeing your entry. You are definitely a very talented individual who has mastered the art of macro photography. I read your blogs and enjoy learning from you.
I enjoy teaching -it's another way for me to learn.
In return, please don't judge me, or others, for trying to become as good as you (or maybe even better one day) by entering this competition and competing with the skill level we have and tools that are available to us. Help us learn to do more with the camera and less with tools, by commenting on how to improve our images from within the camera.
And if we do make a composite image, judge us based on our photography skills of the original images AND our graphic artist skills of the final image, not just on the fact that we took time to stick some images together.
I don't judge anyone -and a lot of what I said wasn't directed at you specifically I was simple commenting on the discussion as a whole. I'm just looking for a little "truth in advertising"
Finally let me say that from your blogs, images and comments in these threads you are obviously passionate about some areas of photography, which I find inspirational, but don't be surprised if others don’t share your passions or have other passions. In the end we all may just have to agree to disagree
I don't want anyone to be like me -nor do I think that I, or anyone else, is the final word on any photographic discipline. There are a lot of different ways of getting from point A to point B -the path you take is neither right nor wrong, it's just different. Like Ansel said: It's the final image that counts. He's right because the viewer does not know or care how you produced the photo -all they know is what they see in front of them, the final product. But how you get there says a lot about the individual making the image. If I took a photo, converted it into an outline, printed it on canvas, and then painted the scene no one would call me a photographer, they'd call me a painter. So why are we referring to graphic artists as photographers?...
You're not making a distinction between good photographers and bad ones. *Anybody can put a pan on the fire, but not everyone can make a great tasting omlet...
I'm dying over here (laughing) with all the analogies and the logistics behind everyone's thought process...It is all good reading and quite entertaining. It is so interesting to read the different opinions, and I think everyone has a point, and interesting ones at that...
*Hmmmm...I must be a Modern Day Woman...cuz I bring home the bacon and fry it up on the pan, cuz I'm a Wommmmmmaaaaannnnnn (Sorry but the commercial popped into my head)...l:D ...
Someone said to me the other day and after reading everything here...I would have to say I am starting to agree....
"The Final Image is What it is All About....not how you got there", but I will add, the journey should be interesting too..(that's my analogy)."
Peace
Donna
PS: Thank goodness for referees cuz it weren't for them, there would be a lot of bloody fields..(Oooo is that another analogy??)
You're only as good as your next photo....
One day, I started writing, not knowing that I had chained myself for life to a noble but merciless master. When God hands you a gift, he also hands you a whip; and the whip is intended solely for self-flagellation...I'm here alone in my dark madness, all by myself with my deck of cards --- and, of course, the whip God gave me." Truman Capote
*Hmmmm...I must be a Modern Day Woman...cuz I bring home the bacon and fry it up on the pan, cuz I'm a Wommmmmmaaaaannnnnn (Sorry but the commercial popped into my head)...l:D ...
I'm dating myself by saying that I remember that commercial! I wonder how well an add like that would do today?
Sorry for the cooking analogies -I just happen to cook (use to pay the rent that way a long time ago). When someone tells me that they like one of my images, but then say that I must have a really good camera I tell them that the next time someone cooks them a really good meal that they should compliment the chef on their pots and pans...
Changes to the rules are possible, but it should be done with great thought and with a clear reason, not just because a couple of people don't like them.
I think there's more than "a couple people" who don't like them - they just don't speak up about it (ever wonder why this topic keeps coming up?). I just think there are people who are looking for a "photography" only contest, thought they found it here without reading the fine print, and realized that it's not what they thought it was.
I was looking through the older dgrin challenges (pre-LPS) and noticed a lot of the winners of those contests aren't around anymore, at least not entering the LPS contest. I'm curious as to why they stopped entering once the LPS started.
On the funny side - when I play a sport, rugby for instance, I go into the game knowing the rules and abide by them as much as I can
To continue with the sports analogy... if rules allow the use of baseball bats into the game of rugby, things kinda change - and maybe some players stop playing that game. Better yet, have baseballs in there too. Maybe some golf clubs and golf balls. Would you still play the game? Or would you desire to play the closest form of pure rugby that you know.
Point is, just because they are all sports "tools" doesn't mean they all belong in the same game. Unless thats what the people/players want. But if you checked into a game that used all kinds of golf clubs, baseball bats, etc without knowing they were ok to use, you would possibly speak out about why it may not be a good idea to say "anything goes". It's too broad. In the analogy, the more "tools" allowed in the rugby game, the harder it would be to spot the "good" rugby players. Who cares if you can shake a defender off with good moves when the defender has a 2-iron in his hand and a bag full of baseballs.
But on the other hand, the more specialized a contest, the fewer players there are making for fewer viewers leading to less traffic and less revenue is generated. I understand why the rules are the way they are (money - makes the world go round), but whats wrong with making a second contest with different rules? It might actually increase traffic even more.
I was looking through the older dgrin challenges (pre-LPS) and noticed a lot of the winners of those contests aren't around anymore, at least not entering the LPS contest. I'm curious as to why they stopped entering once the LPS started.
Some are not with us any more :cry , some made mods and hence can't play, and some are still playing
This thing is, LPS raised the bar quite high, so many of the winning pre-LPS shots would not be on par with the today's crowd
In both cases the primary tool is a camera, so they are both photographers. Is either of them good, or artists? That would be up to the general public to decide. You're still not making a distinction between good and bad photographers -instead you want to call everyone who uses a camera a photographer. I also don't think that you are making a distinction between photography and art...
There are a lot of cooks on the planet, but as a percentage of the population there are very few chefs. Likewise there are a lot of photographers and graphic artists, but how much of what they produce is really art?...
As I see it, the question of what is a photograph and what is art are completely independant questions. Some photographs are art and some aren't. Some artworks are photographs and some aren't. This discussion started with the claim that some kinds of digtial manipulation cause an image to cease being a photograph. There are also even stronger claims in this thread that amount to saying that if you use Photoshop in certain ways you are no longer a photographer no matter what you do with the camera. The adgenda behind the discussion appears to be that certain kinds of images should not be allowed in a competition with "Photographer" in the title; that is really the issue I am trying to address.
As for what is art, that is even a sticker question than what is a photograph. In the world of photograpic art I personally would roughy break works into two classes: popular art and museum art. Popular art being images which are created to be have broad popular appeal and museum art being images targeted at people with significant training in art history and photography. My impression of LPS is that it fits squarely in the camp of popular art .
But on the other hand, the more specialized a contest, the fewer players there are making for fewer viewers leading to less traffic and less revenue is generated. I understand why the rules are the way they are (money - makes the world go round), but whats wrong with making a second contest with different rules? It might actually increase traffic even more.
For myself, I only really have time for one competition. If dgrin had two competitions, I would have to pick one.
When you bring up the question of tools, we all working with different limited tool sets. Everytime I look at either the winners thread or the entry thread I am reminded of what I don't have access to. I certainly could propose rules changes that would give me a significant advantage by forcing other people to live within my bounds but, in my eyes, that is really missing the point of a competition. Personally, I choose to play the best game I can with what I have and let others do the same.
Actually no, there's nothing in my image that wasn't there when I released the shutter, but that's a whole can of worms that should probably be left alone.
Maybe I'm not expressing the distinction I'm making very well, apologies for that.
Charlie
You are right it is a can of worms.
Allowing the shutter open and close only once is a rule I understand. It can be messed with as sherstone has so eloquently demonstrated, but non-the-less, it is a clear rule. If you try to come up with a rule which allows multiple captures to be blended in a computer only under limited circumstances I think you'll find that you are chasing a rat down a hole that has no bottom.
If dgrin had two competitions, I would have to pick one.
Aaah, choices!
You could always go back and forth and might even end up liking one over the other. Either way, by giving choices, these debates for the most part will cease. People like options.
But I'm a fan of Smugmug and like to support them. Going somewhere else would be anti-productive in supporting Smugmug. Why not offer more than one flavor of tea at Dgrin and keep the hits coming? :confused
Yeah right!!! This debate will end when the dgrin servers go up in smoke.
I thought I covered my bases when I put "for the most part". You can't please everyone, but you could work towardsmost everyone.
I actually support servers... hope dgrin datacenters have fire suppression and redundant AC units, otherwise you could feel reeaaal bad about that joke if something bad ever happens. They might also say DoctorIt was tired of the PS debates and purposely detroyed the servers - then change your name to DoctorEvilIt (after the conviction of course) Then you'd have to look for a mini-me and sharks with lasers on top their heads... I heard those aren't cheap.
Wow this thread is like beating a dead horse. :deadhorse
From what I see Photoshoppers will defend thier need to use photoshop because that is what they have to use bring out thier artistic abillity. People who don't use PS (layers, masking, etc) wonder why people need to PS thier entries to the point of making something that was really never there. Or there in different parts, at different times.
The contest rules try to appease the masses with loosely based rules on what u can and can't do in relation to the image. And having the different crowds (PSr's and non-PS'rs) mingle. Well this thread is a result of that.
I say to each his own. But what I do know is Al Gore created the Internet, and Global Warming. And that is all the really matters.
And yes sharks are expensive especially with lasers. :fish
Hi all, this is my 1st post here but I have seen this discussion go on in many other forums as I sure most of you have. We've all read the posts for, against, and every step in between. We've heard the "Ansel" logic and the "if it could be done in the darkroom" logic and the "what is Art" questions. I have one other perspective that I think is at the root of it all:
The problem is competition. It isn't until we enter a contest that we have to talk about rules, level playing fields, what's fair, etc.. That's because we have just left the world of Art and entered the world of Sports. IMO, you can't judge one work of art as compared to another. It's all apples and oranges. You don't have to decide if a creator of a work of art is a graphic artist, photographer, darkroom tech, or sculpter to decide if you are moved by it. But as soon as there is competition, everything changes.
I'm not saying I never enter contests but I do feel when I enter an image in a contest, I have to abide by the rules so I feel a little less artistic. When I make a photograph just for a contest, I feel less like an artist and more like a competitor.
Just a thought....
Aloha!
Mike
Just one more thing to buy and I'll have everything I need.
Comments
By the 1960s, Adams’ energetic work on behalf of photography and the environment began to supersede his own creative work.
Experiments with new techniques and materials led him to make diverse types of imagery, and he produced fewer of the iconic landscapes for which he was best known. As demand for his older work increased, Adams began to print many of his earlier images in a more graphic style, using dramatic tonal contrasts to recast his original vision.
Had Ansel lived long enough I'm sure he would have owned a copy of Photoshop -he really cared more about the final image than about how he got to it. As technology changed Ansel changed with it -which I think says a lot about the creative genius of the man.
But, for the record, the Ansel Adams Excuse is weak, in that it ignores the simple fact that he had excellent images before he went into post processing. He used the dark room to add his own style to an image, he didn't use it as a crutch to compensate for poor technique. IMHO the vast majority of people I see posting images on the web don't use post processing as a tool, they abuse it to make up for a lack of skill with the camera...
I see nothing wrong with post processing -I'd be a hypocrite if I did! As a macro photographer I have to post process my images: I can never eliminate the dust on my sensor (so spots always show) and I have to shoot RAW to get the most detail possible. But I call myself a photographer because I go out of my way to get the image right with the camera: Exposure, composition, etc. The only thing I'm doing in post is "developing the negative" -even Ansel did more post processing than I do now.
As for this contest: I really don't care about the level of post processing. From the beginning it has been a contest about the final image because the rules have been too open. But I'll never take many of the contestants seriously as photographers because they wouldn't be able to compete without a computer. To call someone who relies on post processing to produce an image a photographer is the same as calling me a mechanic just because I'm holding a wrench -and if you knew just how mechanically declined I am that comparison would make sense to you. People run away in fear when they see me with tools...
***I may take a beating for this one, but I think it's funny how being a graphic artist is like being gay. It's OK to admit you're a graphic artist -really it is! There's no need to stay in the closet and call yourselves photographers...
*** Notice the laughing emoticon -that last comment was meant as a joke and I don't want anyone to take it seriously
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
Yup -I delete a lot of photos. I once read that the difference between a pro and an armature is a pro deletes more images
You're not making a distinction between good photographers and bad ones. Anybody can put a pan on the fire, but not everyone can make a great tasting omlet...
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
The vast majority of real world professional photography is not about creating art. It is about creating functional images which satisfy the needs of a customer. Is it fair to call someone who regulary sends his clients home satisfied a bad photographer? Maybe a better term is a good enough photographer.
How about calling that person a graphic artist because the primary tool of their trade is a computer and not a camera?...
I've said it before: Calling someone a photographer just because they use a camera is the same as calling someone a mechanic just because you see them holding a wrench -it's a conclusion drawn by a superficial observation. I might be using that wrench to hammer a nail, or pry up the cover on a bucket of paint...
A lot of painters draw an image on canvas before they pick up a brush -the drawing gives them an outline of what they are going to paint later on. I see a lot of graphic artist using a camera for the same task; to draw an image before they paint it on the computer. But just because they use a camera instead of a pencil that doesn't mean that they are photographers.
I draw the line this way: If you are more concerned about all of the things that make a difference before you press the shutter release then you're a photographer. If you really don't care about what the camera captures because you're just going to change the image once you get it on the computer then you're a graphic artist. There are some, and I'd include Ansel in this category (and to a much lesser extent myself), who use both a camera and post processing to produce an image. How I take a photo is sometimes influenced by what I'm going to do to it later. IE: Under expose because I know the colors will saturate (digital is just like color positive slide film) and I can raise the exposure back up in post if I have to. Compose for a portrait even though I'm holding the camera horizontally because I'm going to turn it 90 degrees on the computer and sometimes holding the camera for a landscape, but framing for a portrait, is easier than turning the camera. Minor examples but I think you get the point. There are some who bracket their shots and then use HDR techniques to blend the best of each exposure and I consider that photography if the person nailed the composition with the view finder...
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
Here's a couple examples of what I am talking about:
Let's I am shooting catalog shots and I have 1000 items to shoot on a white seamless and 4 days to get the job done. My end product is a DVD full of RAW files plus a color checker shot under the same light which I send to the photo editor responsible for putting the catalog together.
Let's say I am shooting portraits of underclassmen for the high school yearbook and I have to crank out 350 portraits a day all shot against the same blue background. I have 5 minutes per student so I don't have time to fiddle with lights. I setup a pair of umbrellas which give me flat so the portrait will look decent no matter how the subject is posed and fire away for the next 8 hours.
Neither of these people is creating art. Neither of them is using a computer for anything more that data storage and previewing images. The are thinking about what makes a difference, but cost and time is as much a part of their equation as quality. The pictures have to be good enough out of camera processed automatically because custom retouching work in Photoshop is too expensive. They are, however, making a living with a camera.
I've been away for a while and have just come back and read through this debate several times. On one level it's quite funny and on another level quite sad.
On the funny side - when I play a sport, rugby for instance, I go into the game knowing the rules and abide by them as much as I can (rugby tends to ring the worst out in me sometimes which is why we have referees!). The rules are there to guide me as a player, and to help me enjoy playing the game. If, for example, I didn't think players should be able to touch the ball with their hands, well, then I'd go and find another game to play, maybe baseball or soccer. Just like sports, I think the same way about this competition, there are rules laid down and I choose to abide by them. If I didn't like the rules, I'd look to see if there was another competition around that had rules that I liked.
On the sad side - living in Asia for the 21 years and especially the last 3 years in the Philippines has taught me a lot about values and things that I should really care about. Here the majority of people care about one thing - getting one solid meal a day in the stomachs. Everyday I am reminded not to get too caught up in small issues and not to let small things bother me, but rather to focus on the bigger issues. To put it bluntly, the issues being debated here seem trivial in the larger scheme of things.
What am I trying to say? You joined the competition, you read the rules. Enjoy playing within the rules as you see fit, but just because someone plays the same game differently, but still within rules, does not make them wrong.
Changes to the rules are possible, but it should be done with great thought and with a clear reason, not just because a couple of people don't like them.
My images | My blog | My free course
Actually no, there's nothing in my image that wasn't there when I released the shutter, but that's a whole can of worms that should probably be left alone.
Maybe I'm not expressing the distinction I'm making very well, apologies for that.
Charlie
In both cases the primary tool is a camera, so they are both photographers. Is either of them good, or artists? That would be up to the general public to decide. You're still not making a distinction between good and bad photographers -instead you want to call everyone who uses a camera a photographer. I also don't think that you are making a distinction between photography and art...
There are a lot of cooks on the planet, but as a percentage of the population there are very few chefs. Likewise there are a lot of photographers and graphic artists, but how much of what they produce is really art?...
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
You brought up a really good point. I'm not trying to say that anyone is right or wrong -again the rules make this competition wide open. From the very first qualifying rounds it was clear that there was going to be a lot of heavy post processing -so much that my wife told me I was crazy for entering.
There is also nothing wrong with post processing. If it's a part of your style, if it's what you use to make your work unique, then why not! In photography, were technique is concerned, there are is no black and white -only varying shades of gray.
But I wouldn't call someone a photographer if their primary tool for creating an image is a computer because that, IMHO, is the definition of a graphic artist. If you can't nail the composition with the viewfinder, if you can't at least get reasonably close to the correct exposure, if you don't understand how the quality of the light effects the color and contrast in your images (and how to take advantage of the light you have) then I'm not going to take you seriously as a photographer. Sorry, but you would have nothing to teach me -and I'm still learning...
To put my images where my mouth is I offer this one sample of many. A shot of an ant at five times life size. Very minimal editing, and I composed the scene with the view finder -kinda hard to reach for the cropping tool when my blog is called "No Cropping Zone"
FWIW this image is only 4.5 millimeters wide...
If I can take an image like that then anyone can -I'm not special...
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
I agree with all your points, except this one
Charlie
Glad you agree
I'm absolutely 100% behind you on that one.
Again I agree with you 100%. Funny thing is, if you look at the explanations from this thread, most of the original shots did nail the composition, light and contrast in all the composite images. Yes, there are some affects added, but by your own definition, in the composite images they are all taken by photographers - BUT the final image is put together by a "photographical artist". In my mind this makes them excellent people to learn from both from a photography point of view (original images) and a graphic artist point of view (final composite).
Out of all the statements this makes me the saddest, because no matter how good you are, you can still always learn something. In fact the best way of learning is to teach, so maybe by helping those of us who are of lesser capabilities it will ultimately benefit yourself.
I'm definitely not in the same level as yourself and can say I have nothing to teach anyone in this competition - that's why I joined - but by sharing what I have learned with others around me, I reinforce my learning’s.
Your images never cease to amaze me and each time a competition is run I always look forward to seeing your entry. You are definitely a very talented individual who has mastered the art of macro photography. I read your blogs and enjoy learning from you.
In return, please don't judge me, or others, for trying to become as good as you (or maybe even better one day) by entering this competition and competing with the skill level we have and tools that are available to us. Help us learn to do more with the camera and less with tools, by commenting on how to improve our images from within the camera.
And if we do make a composite image, judge us based on our photography skills of the original images AND our graphic artist skills of the final image, not just on the fact that we took time to stick some images together.
Finally let me say that from your blogs, images and comments in these threads you are obviously passionate about some areas of photography, which I find inspirational, but don't be surprised if others don’t share your passions or have other passions. In the end we all may just have to agree to disagree
My images | My blog | My free course
Thanks for the props Charlie :cool
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
Let me say it a different way: Someone who does not understand all of the things that you need to pay attention to before you press the shutter release has nothing to teach me. That's not to say that I don't need schoolin' -far from it! But I want to learn from people who, IMHO, are photographers and not graphic artists. I want to learn how to capture the light with a camera, and not draw it on a computer...
I disagree because I learn from just about everyone...
I enjoy teaching -it's another way for me to learn.
I don't judge anyone -and a lot of what I said wasn't directed at you specifically I was simple commenting on the discussion as a whole. I'm just looking for a little "truth in advertising"
I don't want anyone to be like me -nor do I think that I, or anyone else, is the final word on any photographic discipline. There are a lot of different ways of getting from point A to point B -the path you take is neither right nor wrong, it's just different. Like Ansel said: It's the final image that counts. He's right because the viewer does not know or care how you produced the photo -all they know is what they see in front of them, the final product. But how you get there says a lot about the individual making the image. If I took a photo, converted it into an outline, printed it on canvas, and then painted the scene no one would call me a photographer, they'd call me a painter. So why are we referring to graphic artists as photographers?...
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
I'm dying over here (laughing) with all the analogies and the logistics behind everyone's thought process...It is all good reading and quite entertaining. It is so interesting to read the different opinions, and I think everyone has a point, and interesting ones at that...
*Hmmmm...I must be a Modern Day Woman...cuz I bring home the bacon and fry it up on the pan, cuz I'm a Wommmmmmaaaaannnnnn (Sorry but the commercial popped into my head)...l:D
Someone said to me the other day and after reading everything here...I would have to say I am starting to agree....
"The Final Image is What it is All About....not how you got there", but I will add, the journey should be interesting too..(that's my analogy).
Peace
Donna
PS: Thank goodness for referees cuz it weren't for them, there would be a lot of bloody fields..(Oooo is that another analogy??)
I'm dating myself by saying that I remember that commercial! I wonder how well an add like that would do today?
Sorry for the cooking analogies -I just happen to cook (use to pay the rent that way a long time ago). When someone tells me that they like one of my images, but then say that I must have a really good camera I tell them that the next time someone cooks them a really good meal that they should compliment the chef on their pots and pans...
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
I think there's more than "a couple people" who don't like them - they just don't speak up about it (ever wonder why this topic keeps coming up?). I just think there are people who are looking for a "photography" only contest, thought they found it here without reading the fine print, and realized that it's not what they thought it was.
I was looking through the older dgrin challenges (pre-LPS) and noticed a lot of the winners of those contests aren't around anymore, at least not entering the LPS contest. I'm curious as to why they stopped entering once the LPS started.
To continue with the sports analogy... if rules allow the use of baseball bats into the game of rugby, things kinda change - and maybe some players stop playing that game. Better yet, have baseballs in there too. Maybe some golf clubs and golf balls. Would you still play the game? Or would you desire to play the closest form of pure rugby that you know.
Point is, just because they are all sports "tools" doesn't mean they all belong in the same game. Unless thats what the people/players want. But if you checked into a game that used all kinds of golf clubs, baseball bats, etc without knowing they were ok to use, you would possibly speak out about why it may not be a good idea to say "anything goes". It's too broad. In the analogy, the more "tools" allowed in the rugby game, the harder it would be to spot the "good" rugby players. Who cares if you can shake a defender off with good moves when the defender has a 2-iron in his hand and a bag full of baseballs.
But on the other hand, the more specialized a contest, the fewer players there are making for fewer viewers leading to less traffic and less revenue is generated. I understand why the rules are the way they are (money - makes the world go round), but whats wrong with making a second contest with different rules? It might actually increase traffic even more.
This thing is, LPS raised the bar quite high, so many of the winning pre-LPS shots would not be on par with the today's crowd
As I see it, the question of what is a photograph and what is art are completely independant questions. Some photographs are art and some aren't. Some artworks are photographs and some aren't. This discussion started with the claim that some kinds of digtial manipulation cause an image to cease being a photograph. There are also even stronger claims in this thread that amount to saying that if you use Photoshop in certain ways you are no longer a photographer no matter what you do with the camera. The adgenda behind the discussion appears to be that certain kinds of images should not be allowed in a competition with "Photographer" in the title; that is really the issue I am trying to address.
As for what is art, that is even a sticker question than what is a photograph. In the world of photograpic art I personally would roughy break works into two classes: popular art and museum art. Popular art being images which are created to be have broad popular appeal and museum art being images targeted at people with significant training in art history and photography. My impression of LPS is that it fits squarely in the camp of popular art .
You should look into the Worth1000 contests. The rules there look like they are much more your cup of tea: http://www.worth1000.com/stories/thread.asp?cid=19&eid=323889
For myself, I only really have time for one competition. If dgrin had two competitions, I would have to pick one.
When you bring up the question of tools, we all working with different limited tool sets. Everytime I look at either the winners thread or the entry thread I am reminded of what I don't have access to. I certainly could propose rules changes that would give me a significant advantage by forcing other people to live within my bounds but, in my eyes, that is really missing the point of a competition. Personally, I choose to play the best game I can with what I have and let others do the same.
You are right it is a can of worms.
Allowing the shutter open and close only once is a rule I understand. It can be messed with as sherstone has so eloquently demonstrated, but non-the-less, it is a clear rule. If you try to come up with a rule which allows multiple captures to be blended in a computer only under limited circumstances I think you'll find that you are chasing a rat down a hole that has no bottom.
You could always go back and forth and might even end up liking one over the other. Either way, by giving choices, these debates for the most part will cease. People like options.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
But I'm a fan of Smugmug and like to support them. Going somewhere else would be anti-productive in supporting Smugmug. Why not offer more than one flavor of tea at Dgrin and keep the hits coming? :confused
I thought I covered my bases when I put "for the most part". You can't please everyone, but you could work towards most everyone.
I actually support servers... hope dgrin datacenters have fire suppression and redundant AC units, otherwise you could feel reeaaal bad about that joke if something bad ever happens. They might also say DoctorIt was tired of the PS debates and purposely detroyed the servers - then change your name to DoctorEvilIt (after the conviction of course)
From what I see Photoshoppers will defend thier need to use photoshop because that is what they have to use bring out thier artistic abillity. People who don't use PS (layers, masking, etc) wonder why people need to PS thier entries to the point of making something that was really never there. Or there in different parts, at different times.
The contest rules try to appease the masses with loosely based rules on what u can and can't do in relation to the image. And having the different crowds (PSr's and non-PS'rs) mingle. Well this thread is a result of that.
I say to each his own. But what I do know is Al Gore created the Internet, and Global Warming. And that is all the really matters.
And yes sharks are expensive especially with lasers. :fish
The problem is competition. It isn't until we enter a contest that we have to talk about rules, level playing fields, what's fair, etc.. That's because we have just left the world of Art and entered the world of Sports. IMO, you can't judge one work of art as compared to another. It's all apples and oranges. You don't have to decide if a creator of a work of art is a graphic artist, photographer, darkroom tech, or sculpter to decide if you are moved by it. But as soon as there is competition, everything changes.
I'm not saying I never enter contests but I do feel when I enter an image in a contest, I have to abide by the rules so I feel a little less artistic. When I make a photograph just for a contest, I feel less like an artist and more like a competitor.
Just a thought....
Mike
Reeflections Gallery
Underwater Photography Workshops & Ikelite equipment
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]