Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Adam, I see a lot of stuff -- mainly on Photo.net -- that's highly altered. Some of it is extremely good. OTOH, some of it appears overdone to me. I don't mean to imply that post processing is bad. The LUG is a great example of examples of good photography. There are some exceptionally talented post processors. But people on this list understand classical photography. The images still look like photographs. I've look at nearly every link that's posted on the LUG and I can't remember one image that I thought crossed the line. But digital is still fairly new. Most current photographers have been exposed to classical disciplines -- such as Ansel Adams' previsualization, and HCB's "f8 and be there". I just wonder what the future holds if the next generation of photographers shift their focus from previsualization to postrealization. Is it possible we're moving in the direction? Maybe it's not a bad thing. There's always been a fine line between graphic art and photography. DaveR -----Original Message----- From: Adam Bridge [mailto:abridge@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 1:10 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] re: digital treadmill How is step (3) different in terms of manipulation between the two cases? Is it that darkroom manipulation is physical in nature whereas manipulation of an image on the computer is less so? I agree that it's possible to use Photoshop or some other program to do things to an image that are completely impossibe in the darkroom or to do things that are just very hard. But I think most people who post to this list do on the computer the same things that they'd do in the darkroom, just in a different way. Adam Bridge On 1/16/06, David Rodgers <drodgers@casefarms.com> wrote: > Feli, > > Once upon a time photography was, 1) see something interesting, 2) take > a picture, 3) make the best print of it you can. > > The trend in photography seems to be 1) see anything, 2) take a picture, > 3) use a computer to make it interesting. > > Maybe what some people are still calling photography ought to be called > digography. > > > >>Take a look at this program, for a peek at cutting edge image > manipulation technology. The color correction tools offered in this > package are light years ahead of anything in PS. > > http://www.d2software.com/nuke.php << > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >