Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/27

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Is that so wrong?
From: ericm at pobox.com (Eric)
Date: Sun Feb 27 06:54:15 2005
References: <65.3fe63ced.2f525bc1@aol.com> <55535f5fcbf922c4bd43a628f369119b@paulhardycarter.com>

Paul:

>If you take that image, mix it up with a few others, 
>distort perspective, add blur, and on and on, then I don't think it is 
>a photograph any more. That's what I think we should have a name for.

What if you leave out the part about mixing in with others?  I agree that a
collage is not a photo.

But if I can do it in the darkroom and it's called a photo, why can't I do
it in Photoshop and also call it a photo?

It's a pain to straighten out "falling" buildings in the darkroom.  But it
can be done.  I'm not anywhere close to what I consider to be a good
darkroom printer.  So I figure that if I can do it, it must not be too hard.
:)  Same with adding blur.

Both of those seem to be smaller manipulations, just beyond dodging/burning.
Now, physically moving things around and adding/removing elements...  that
starts to get into the realm of "photo illustration" to me.

--
Eric
http://canid.com/


In reply to: Message from SonC at aol.com (SonC@aol.com) ([Leica] Is that so wrong?)
Message from paul at paulhardycarter.com (Paul) ([Leica] Is that so wrong?)