Darklightimaging.com is off line right now... I will look at tomorrow. I'm very interested in HDR shots. So thanks for the links.
Took a good look at dave hills stuff, it's pretty unbelievable.
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
Darklightimaging.com is off line right now... I will look at tomorrow. I'm very interested in HDR shots. So thanks for the links.
Took a good look at dave hills stuff, it's pretty unbelievable.
I wonder how he does it.
Gee, me too
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
Darklightimaging.com is off line right now... I will look at tomorrow. I'm very interested in HDR shots. So thanks for the links.
Took a good look at dave hills stuff, it's pretty unbelievable.
Oh I will, I'm seriously so motivated after looking at some of those images. Cool stuff.
Congrats on 400 posts, nite man!
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
Getting back to the main question, manipulation or not, with the press I dont think manipulation should be allowed, if its news then it should be shown as it was at the time taken, they are supposed to report the truth, forgive me if I laugh at this point ROFL.
With Art which is what photography is, then of course it should be allowed, after all then the scene becomes your interpretation, its why most of us shoot in raw, so that we can manipulate, a painter manipulates by exagerating features he wants you to be drawn to or exagerating colour, Photographers are artists so they should have the choice to do what they want to do with there images, it is there right.
Personally I am not good enough to do anything other than the basic stuff right now, I am in the learning stages of photoshop, but when you look at Dave Hills stuff then it is inspiring to any artist aka photographer, I aspire to being able to do things like him.
May this talk rage on.
www.dcimages.org.uk
"A good photograph is one that communicate a fact, touches the heart, leaves the viewer a changed person for having seen it. It is, in a word, effective." - Irving Penn
photobod wrote: Getting back to the main question, manipulation or not, with the press I dont think manipulation should be allowed, if its news then it should be shown as it was at the time taken, they are supposed to report the truth, forgive me if I laugh at this point ROFL.
With Art which is what photography is, then of course it should be allowed, after all then the scene becomes your interpretation, its why most of us shoot in raw, so that we can manipulate, a painter manipulates by exagerating features he wants you to be drawn to or exagerating colour, Photographers are artists so they should have the choice to do what they want to do with there images, it is there right.
Personally I am not good enough to do anything other than the basic stuff right now, I am in the learning stages of photoshop, but when you look at Dave Hills stuff then it is inspiring to any artist aka photographer, I aspire to being able to do things like him.
May this talk rage on.
You bring up a good point. News agencies should report it as is, not their vision of it. Art on the other hand is your vision.
Good point.
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
photobod wrote: Getting back to the main question, manipulation or not, with the press I dont think manipulation should be allowed, if its news then it should be shown as it was at the time taken, they are supposed to report the truth, forgive me if I laugh at this point ROFL.
With Art which is what photography is, then of course it should be allowed, after all then the scene becomes your interpretation, its why most of us shoot in raw, so that we can manipulate, a painter manipulates by exagerating features he wants you to be drawn to or exagerating colour, Photographers are artists so they should have the choice to do what they want to do with there images, it is there right.
Personally I am not good enough to do anything other than the basic stuff right now, I am in the learning stages of photoshop, but when you look at Dave Hills stuff then it is inspiring to any artist aka photographer, I aspire to being able to do things like him.
May this talk rage on.
You bring up a good point. News agencies should report it as is, not their vision of it. Art on the other hand is your vision.
photobod wrote: Getting back to the main question, manipulation or not, with the press I dont think manipulation should be allowed, if its news then it should be shown as it was at the time taken, they are supposed to report the truth, forgive me if I laugh at this point ROFL.
With Art which is what photography is, then of course it should be allowed, after all then the scene becomes your interpretation, its why most of us shoot in raw, so that we can manipulate, a painter manipulates by exagerating features he wants you to be drawn to or exagerating colour, Photographers are artists so they should have the choice to do what they want to do with there images, it is there right.
Personally I am not good enough to do anything other than the basic stuff right now, I am in the learning stages of photoshop, but when you look at Dave Hills stuff then it is inspiring to any artist aka photographer, I aspire to being able to do things like him.
May this talk rage on.
You bring up a good point. News agencies should report it as is, not their vision of it. Art on the other hand is your vision.
Good point.
I'll second that, just like what one person see's as art doesn't necessarily mean others will see that.
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
Alex wrote: Hmmm interesting question. I think this will have many answers. There are those who would be classified as photography traditionalist who take a photo and place it in a vault for no changes to be made. While on the other side of the fence you have photographers off all skill sets, some of which are masters at manipulating photos via software like Photoshop, others are not as good. I think photography is an extension of each persons personality. So manipulate, or don't. If you are happy with the photo, and it appeals to your taste, then rock it!
As for me, I like tooling around with Photoshop and some of my photos. So I'm all for manipulation.
I agree with Alex. I also feel it depends on the photo and what it's used for. Also how well the photo was done.
I agree. It is the intended "audience" of the photo and the intent of the "artist". Personally, I like "real" looking photos and those that are "art" but not so much the cartoonish ones that look "sort of real". Just sayin'.
as a "media" photographer I prefer my work to be "real" life as it was when I shot it but as the son of a painter and photographer I appreciate the artistic aspects of manipulation . I am also not skilled enough to HDR an image or use photoshop to alter it well. I prefer filters as my method of manipulation of a scene or an image.
Rob pix4u2 wrote: as a "media" photographer I prefer my work to be "real" life as it was when I shot it but as the son of a painter and photographer I appreciate the artistic aspects of manipulation . I am also not skilled enough to HDR an image or use photoshop to alter it well. I prefer filters as my method of manipulation of a scene or an image.
While your picture is nice and interesting, it's done. You can't do much else to that picture because it's already got the prism effect on it.
The Fujifilm XT5 is a 40MP mirrorless camera capable of 6.2K video at 30p. With those specs, it’s an ideal choice for photographers needing a camera to pull double duty for imaging and video.
The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!
Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.
The Canon EOS R50 is one of the newest R-system cameras from Canon. Is it worth your money? Find out all the details you need to know in this comprehensive review.
Child portrait photography is a unique undertaking requiring special skills and talents to get the best results. Start mastering this photography niche with these essential tips!
The Fujifilm XT5 is a 40MP mirrorless camera capable of 6.2K video at 30p. With those specs, it’s an ideal choice for photographers needing a camera to pull double duty for imaging and video.
Using leading lines in photography helps improve the composition by drawing viewers in and leading their eye from the foreground to the background. Explore some fine examples of this in this guide!
The Insta360 has one of the best lineups of action cams and 360-degree cameras. With these Insta360 accessories, you can elevate your photography and videography game!
Creating impactful photos of landscapes depends on many factors, not the least of which is your talent behind the lens. This guide explores other elements required for the best product.
The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!
The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV is a micro four thirds camera released in 2020. It’s an entry-level system along with the OM-D E-M5 Mark III. Use this guide to determine which one is best for you!
TCav 8 posts
Scotty 6 posts
CharleyL 5 posts
Sawyer 4 posts
No Show 3 posts
Tristan R 3 posts
db3348 3 posts
Hassner 3 posts
Shadowfixe... 2 posts
Amy Porter 2 posts
