Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Is This What It's Come To?  (Read 9889 times)
Joe Behar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


« Reply #60 on: February 26, 2011, 03:06:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that Elvis paintings on black velvet and dogs playing cards are in the tacky category, but apart from that I'm hesitant to make a call on tacky or classy.

Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6259



WWW
« Reply #61 on: February 26, 2011, 04:03:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that Elvis paintings on black velvet and dogs playing cards are in the tacky category

From what I've seen there are plenty of people out there who wouldn't agree.

Quote
but apart from that I'm hesitant to make a call on tacky or classy.

But I'm not.
Logged

LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 819


« Reply #62 on: February 26, 2011, 04:35:04 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that Elvis paintings on black velvet and dogs playing cards are in the tacky category, but apart from that I'm hesitant to make a call on tacky or classy.

Don't forget the practice of taking these artifacts and putting them in a new context where they will be subject to ironic interpretation.  The word "camp" comes to mind.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5894


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #63 on: February 26, 2011, 04:48:20 PM »
ReplyReply

... The editor liked the image, felt it would work well with the theme of the issue and licensed it...

If I want to be mean, I would say something like this: of course it worked well with the theme... "dreamscapes"... as dreams = unreal. Had you moved your sliders a bit more to the right, the editor would have had to change the title to: "nightmarescapes". But I do not want to be mean, so I will not say it.  Wink
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #64 on: February 27, 2011, 08:47:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, now that's really classy too, Slobodan.
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #65 on: February 27, 2011, 12:31:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
And they want their nature presented with no or minimum manipulation (the likes of Peter Lik, Tom Mangelsen, and Michael Fatali).
This is where I call BS. These guys sell Cibachrome prints from Velvia chromes, that in many cases were shot with on-camera filtration (polarizers, grads, maybe color-compensating filters). Just because they're not using photoshop, doesn't mean they're not enhancing their photos. Velvia colors can be called a lot of things, but accurate is not one of them (not with a straight face, anyway).

IMHO, to argue that a Fatali/Lik print is more "authentic" or "honest" than a digital photographer using curves, saturation, even exposure blending to achieve the same end result is utter nonsense. I'm sorry but I just don't see how anyone who knows anything about photography can honestly argue otherwise. The fact that Fatali/Lik have used such claims to increase sales just illustrates how many suckers are out there. IMHO Fatali/Lik are being disingenous at best when making such claims in their marketing.

Now if you want to argue that their photos are more "authentic" than somebody who added or removed objects to the image in a way that misrepresents the reality of the scene depicted, then OK I can agree with that. But it's not fair to assume that such manipulations have occurred to any image that has had computer post-processing done (which is what the anti-digital folks will often imply if not argue outright).
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5894


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #66 on: February 27, 2011, 12:57:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, now that's really classy too, Slobodan.

You know... being nasty and personal is not just your divine privilege. You opened the door.

P.S. I have very little interest in continuing this on a personal level, as the subject has nothing to do with me or you personally. It does raise some interesting and valid points, and I will continue to address them accordingly.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2011, 01:07:40 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5894


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #67 on: February 27, 2011, 01:35:43 PM »
ReplyReply

What's considered manipulation ? What's considered too much ? Who decides ? Ever see the true original half dome of Ansel Adams and the print he did later ?

Michael, you might remember that I stated several times in the past that I love your photography, so nothing that I say about image manipulation in general should be interpreted as a comment on you or your photography.

The questions like these above have tortured mankind since the dawn of philosophy, and even today whole Phd dissertations could be written (and are) trying to answer it. But, for the purpose of this debate, I will limit my answers to my own rule of thumb:

What's considered manipulation? Like pornography, hard to define, but you'll know it when you see it.

What's considered too much? When they ask you: "Was it photoshopped?".

Who decides? Buyers.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #68 on: February 27, 2011, 02:56:27 PM »
ReplyReply

You know... being nasty and personal is not just your divine privilege. You opened the door.

P.S. I have very little interest in continuing this on a personal level, as the subject has nothing to do with me or you personally. It does raise some interesting and valid points, and I will continue to address them accordingly.

There was nothing 'nasty' in my remarks.  You don't want your arguments torn apart, make better arguments.  There was nothing ad hominem in my remarks either.  If you think there are valid points being raised, I invite you to address them.  You haven't as of yet.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5894


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #69 on: February 27, 2011, 03:18:15 PM »
ReplyReply

There was nothing 'nasty' in my remarks.  You don't want your arguments torn apart, make better arguments.  There was nothing ad hominem in my remarks either.  If you think there are valid points being raised, I invite you to address them.  You haven't as of yet.

If you consider labeling my arguments as "Bullshit.  Complete, total, utter bullshit" constitutes "tearing them apart" and not nasty and personal, then we live on different planets. If you called my posted examples "big deal" sarcastically, and if you told me that I have no idea what I am talking about, and you do not consider that nasty and personal, then we live on different planets.

As whether I addressed any of the valid points raised, and how well, I will leave to others to judge. However, the fact that you did not like what I said is a completely different matter.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #70 on: February 27, 2011, 04:10:24 PM »
ReplyReply

.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad