Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/04/20

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy
From: sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter)
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:06:14 -0500
References: <200904201058.BPA26179@rg5.comporium.net> <49ECBDF4.7070702@mcclary.net> <CF5B80EA-F9CD-4914-A068-6DFEDE8863F8@mac.com>

Not terribly
sure what "journalist" is now
I once was one


On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 1:36 PM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at 
mac.com>wrote:

> I agree.
> And also suspect that
> as time goes on
> the "journalism" line (which most of us seem to instinctively agree on)
> will continue to creep toward the spectacular
> and away from the natural.
> ;~(
> As "journalists" themselves
> seem to be pushing it;
> whether in the name of stock sales
> or
> in the name of style.
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
> On Apr 20, 2009, at 1:24 PM, Harrison McClary wrote:
>
>  First I agree that almost all photos need "something" other than the
>> default RAW settings in Lightroom or whatever.  However; looking at his
>> photos they are way over processed.
>>
>> Never did I make a straight print working news, always there was some
>> burning, dodging and in B&W sometimes bleaching to get the print to look
>> like what I "saw" when I made the photo.  To expect that there be a great
>> straight shot just because we now shoot digital is a little ridiculous.  I
>> keep thinking back to my old friend from my Atlanta days who got in 
>> trouble
>> a few years ago in Charlotte for his "manipulation" of digital files.  
>> From
>> what I saw he did nothing wrong.  the intent of his photos was not 
>> altered,
>> just colors SLIGHTLY pumped and backgrounds burned down, no big deal, 
>> IMHO.
>>
>> Now these photos in the link Tina shared look like they came from a
>> cartoon, guy really needs to learn how to tweak an image without going 
>> over
>> the top.
>>
>> On 4/20/09 5:58 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
>>
>>> The judges thought he used too much photoshop based on the difference
>>> between the photos he submitted and the RAW file.  The photographer 
>>> argues
>>> that a RAW file is not really indicative of what the scene looks like
>>> without being converted and that the appearance of the submitted files
>>> depends on which software is used.
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Harrison Mcclary
>>
>> Harrison McClary Photography
>>        (615) 331-7794
>>        harrison at mcclary.net
>>        http://www.mcclary.net
>>    ImageStockSouth:
>>        Stock photography from the Southern USA
>>        http://www.imagestocksouth.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
Regards,

Sonny
http://www.sonc.com
http://sonc.stumbleupon.com/
Natchitoches, Louisiana
USA


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy)
In reply to: Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy)
Message from lists at mcclary.net (Harrison McClary) ([Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy)