[LRFlex] Re: The camera never lies - but PS is downright dishonest

  • From: Bob Palmieri <rpalmier@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:45:23 -0500

Y'all -

I wouldn't be able to get anything out of the "pallette & brush set" Me, I really like a "ripping good snap", like some fiction fans like a "ripping good yarn." I don't care what someone hadta do to get it that way ('cept so far as I wanna steal good techniques for my own use!) Those who make assumptions about the documentary veracity of the image do so at their peril.

This having been said, I find that 99% of my own stuff falls into the "straight & narrow" unmanipulated category; not because I think there's anything "righter" about this method, but only because it seems like the most effective tool. Many folks have pointed out that we all manipulate the shots just by our choices of what to eliminate from the original framing, let alone cropping choices.

One problem comes that can come up is when some of us "clean up" a snap, say by removing a distracting branch from a birdshot; without realizing it we might be distorting real information that others with specific knowledge might be able to "read."
The infamous National Geographic cover with the repositioned pyramid comes to mind...
Maybe we oughtta establish standards for a "Stamp of Documentary Veracity" - all other rectangular representations would be judged simply on their effectveness at tickling our fancies.


Really nice job on the revision, Douglas.

Bob Palmieri




On Jun 29, 2005, at 9:07 AM, David Young wrote:

Good Mornin' Douglas, from an unseasonably cool part of Canada!

Personaly, I like the "after" shot... quite dramatic - and quite nicely done.

When I first started digital work, I wondered about 'diddling' with the image. It seemed, somehow, "unpure".

Yet, when we used the wet darkroom, with silver prints, we cropped, dodged, burned, switched papers & their contrast grades, and compensated for overall exposure... in fact, we did anything we could think of, all in the persuit of the "perfect print". And all without ever thinking that we were making something that was 'unpure'. We were just making prints!

So, I have come to rationalize that anything we can do, digitally, which is analagous to what we'd do with a silver print, is justified.

Removing lamp standards, overhead wires and other stuff, iinserting objects which were never there, or drastically changing the colour balance (except when restoring old prints and slides), is still taboo, to my way of thinking. If we do these things, we are no longer photographers, but painters ... and, we should trade in our cameras for a pallette and brush set.

I like what you've done with that train. Face it. When we saw those dramatic prints in LIFE magazine, do we *really* think that they came that way, right out of the camera?

Have fun! Yer doin' fine!

David.

---------------------------

On 29/06/2005 at 11:41 AM Douglas Sharp wrote:

Usually I only sharpen my shots and adjust the levels, yesterday I went
the whole hog! Just to see what PS Elements 3.0 can do.


Very much over the top :

http://gallery.leica-users.org/Railway-Heritage/German_Steam_Before
http://gallery.leica-users.org/Railway-Heritage/German_Steam_After

I don't really know whether I like the idea of cheating like this, but
it was fun finding out out how.
cheers
Douglas

David Young, Logan Lake, BC CANADA.

Personal Web-site at: http://www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr
Leica Reflex Forum web-page: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm

------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
    http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
    www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
   http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
   www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: