Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/04/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> wrote: >Thing is for years and before Photoshop standard bird and other animal >photography has been with very long lenses and picking a moment when there >is nothing of course; between YOU and THEM. A brief moment I'd think when >you had them in the clear. >The fact is this is an abstraction. It's possible to have a clear view of the subject and still show that it's in dense brush or tall grass: http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/phasianidae/spgr00.html http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/phasianidae/rnph01.html http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/mimidae/cbth00.html http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/emberizidae/atsp00.html >In real life you're not going to see a bird like that as if your right on >top of it. Its going to be far away and in the thicket. Rhino's too I think. >I say all this because there is a mind set now that photography became >"fake" when it went digital. And I don't think that's the case. >Photography was never real. I agree, it's never been real, but if the photographer chooses to (s)he can convey as much accuracy as possible. >We cant trust the reality of a photo now because of Photoshop? >No we never could. >There was airbrush. I owned one. This isn't exclusively a photoshop issue. As far as I'm concerned airbrushing alters pictures too and has as much potential for distorting accuracy as photoshop work does. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com