Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Do You Manipulate Your Images  (Read 10437 times)
pegelli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 606



WWW
« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2011, 09:14:44 AM »
ReplyReply

I will also repeat that "a photograph is only the printed image in paper" that means that for the photographer to vision the photograph before capture he has the whole process in mind, right to the final print, he has even pre-decided the type of paper for his final print, he doesn't have to look at the screen (if he is using digital) either! Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

For me this level of detailed visualisation is utopic and not required to appreciate something as art.
Both serendipity as well as continued development of the object (photo or other) during the process can result in art.

Btw, I do manipulate my images and sometimes in directions I had not thought of when taking the shot, but granted I do not create art  Wink
« Last Edit: October 20, 2011, 09:19:19 AM by pegelli » Logged

pieter, aka pegelli
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2011, 11:36:31 AM »
ReplyReply

For me this level of detailed visualisation is utopic and not required to appreciate something as art.
Both serendipity as well as continued development of the object (photo or other) during the process can result in art.

Btw, I do manipulate my images and sometimes in directions I had not thought of when taking the shot, but granted I do not create art  Wink
Q.E.D! I hope you understand that my intention is not to dictate what artistic approach should be, but rather to express my opinion on it. This creates discussion and can initiate concern in the approach which may be very beneficial, I find your quote honest and in my view in line with mine, the later is because you state "but granted I don't create art" at the end of it, I know that are many people that enjoy taking pictures and they are right in doing so..., but this is totally different than trying to diminish photography as an art completely and dictate to others to do the same. Regards,theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Logged
pegelli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 606



WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 20, 2011, 12:57:13 PM »
ReplyReply

..., but this is totally different than trying to diminish photography as an art completely and dictate to others to do the same. Regards,theodoros.

Thanks Theodoros, but I don't see anybody doing that here, but merely objecting (including myself) to the notion that a complete detailed visualisation to the level you're describing is an absolute requirement for photography to be art. For me it's just one way of many different ways art can be created.
Logged

pieter, aka pegelli
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #23 on: October 20, 2011, 04:10:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Theodoros, but I don't see anybody doing that here, but merely objecting (including myself) to the notion that a complete detailed visualisation to the level you're describing is an absolute requirement for photography to be art. For me it's just one way of many different ways art can be created.
But then you have to suggest those additional ways, isn't it? I mean I can have a discussion and be prepared to even accept (or not accept), if somebody would say that he discovered something later in one of his photographs that didn't work the way he originally intended (as i suspect you suggest that can happen, correct me if I'm wrong), but again, he will have to have a new visualization of a result, won't he? Anyway, it's different to have such a discussion which at least takes the visualization of the result as fundamental (for any kind of art) and suggests additional methods, than have to argue with people that, don't even take serious the statements of great artists about that fundamental. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #24 on: October 20, 2011, 07:44:01 PM »
ReplyReply

... Sometimes art is a happy accident ...

In retrospect, I think I used the wrong word.  I think spontaneous is a better word than accident.

I intended to capture that shot - but the time between that intention and the execution was less than a second.  I heard the geese honking as I was setting up the other shot and looked up to see them cruising towards the pond from my right.  I quickly loosened my tripod head and panned to grab the shot - I knew I would get an interesting assortment of shots as I had bracketing on for 5 shots 1EV apart. 

I defend that process.   I still don't know what size or paper I will print this image on, perhaps metallic, perhaps a face-mounted luster.  That doesn't mean it isn't valid piece of work.
Logged
pegelli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 606



WWW
« Reply #25 on: October 20, 2011, 11:59:50 PM »
ReplyReply

But then you have to suggest those additional ways, isn't it?

I did, read reply #20 in this thread above.
Obviously these steps also involve "seeing something" (visualisation) that you did not notice before.

And Jeremy, I agree with you. The difference between serendipity and split second visualization is mainly semantic  Wink. I admire people who can "see" something and react almost instantaneously and then perfect it later when finishing it. 
« Last Edit: October 21, 2011, 12:54:42 AM by pegelli » Logged

pieter, aka pegelli
Richowens
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 842



« Reply #26 on: October 21, 2011, 12:49:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I intended to capture that shot - but the time between that intention and the execution was less than a second. 

 Great reaction...........well done!

Rich
Logged

Corvus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2011, 02:58:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I just now realized that I never answered the original question:

"Do You Manipulate Your Images?"

Yes.

To me the final image is everything and the means to that end irrelevant - at least when speaking in aesthetic terms.

To put it another way - if any given image was taken by an auto surveillance camera at a Walmart parking lot or by Ansel Adams in the high Sierras in either case you are stuck with judging it on it's own merits without reference to anything beyond the image its self...

.....Is it "art" or just another random snapshot of a pretty bird? Or maybe, at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter.....

« Last Edit: October 21, 2011, 05:17:51 AM by Corvus » Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2011, 06:06:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I just now realized that I never answered the original question:

"Do You Manipulate Your Images?"

Yes.

To me the final image is everything and the means to that end irrelevant - at least when speaking in aesthetic terms.

To put it another way - if any given image was taken by an auto surveillance camera at a Walmart parking lot or by Ansel Adams in the high Sierras in either case you are stuck with judging it on it's own merits without reference to anything beyond the image its self...

.....Is it "art" or just another random snapshot of a pretty bird? Or maybe, at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter.....


I think that the conversation has gone beyond that, I mean "the final image is everything" is to your opinion a process that should be predetermined by the photographer before shooting as I say and the great masters also said, or is it unrelated to capturing? In other words isn't the capturing process (framing, dof control, exposure, prespective etc) a crucial process that the photographer should pre-decide to achieve the result and if yes is the (obvious) answer..., to do this doesn't he have to visualize the result? I believe that nobody can argue with the above fundamental to photography! Now if something different appears in the process (as Pegelli suggested may happen) and if this is still photography, its a completely different discussion which I have no objection to have (it can only be beneficial) but I am not prepared to consider somebody as being a photographer who questions the above fundamental, to me is like saying 1+1= ...11! Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2011, 06:32:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I am not prepared to consider somebody as being a photographer who questions the above fundamental,

In the context of this community, to publicly reject someone as 'a photographer' is pretty provocative and is a fundamentally rude position to take.

We are all photographers here - aspiring, amateur, professional, accomplished, talented, not so talented ...

.. to try and start declaring who is and who is not a photographer in this manner is fundamentally unacceptable behavior.  

I wish you would keep some of these feelings to yourself.
Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #30 on: October 21, 2011, 07:03:41 AM »
ReplyReply

In the context of this community, to publicly reject someone as 'a photographer' is pretty provocative and is a fundamentally rude position to take.

We are all photographers here - aspiring, amateur, professional, accomplished, talented, not so talented ...

.. to try and start declaring who is and who is not a photographer in this manner is fundamentally unacceptable behavior.  

I wish you would keep some of these feelings to yourself.
When did I say "REJECT"? "CONSIDER" is the word.. and the conversation now is "photographer as an artist", so photographer refers to that only. It's pretty much obvious... Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2704


« Reply #31 on: October 21, 2011, 08:59:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't know why but you seem to be constantly picking a fight. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. You shouldn't take things so personally. Smiley
Logged

stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2704


« Reply #32 on: October 21, 2011, 09:03:32 AM »
ReplyReply

I will also repeat that "a photograph is only the printed image in paper" that means that for the photographer to vision the photograph before capture he has the whole process in mind, right to the final print, he has even pre-decided the type of paper for his final print, he doesn't have to look at the screen (if he is using digital) either! Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

What happens when he/she gets home and discovers that the type of paper that he/she envisaged has been eaten by the dog or there isn't any left. Does that mean you have to shoot the image again or hopefully buy some more? Wink Smiley
Logged

fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #33 on: October 21, 2011, 09:17:55 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't know why but you seem to be constantly picking a fight. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. You shouldn't take things so personally. Smiley
Opinion exists if its backed up with reasoning, otherwise its not an opinion its an attack and attacks can be defended with reasoning. The reasoning of your quote? Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #34 on: October 21, 2011, 09:22:27 AM »
ReplyReply

What happens when he/she gets home and discovers that the type of paper that he/she envisaged has been eaten by the dog or there isn't any left. Does that mean you have to shoot the image again or hopefully buy some more? Wink Smiley
You kill the dog?... just a question on your logic (which of course kills the subject). Cool Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #35 on: October 21, 2011, 09:36:51 AM »
ReplyReply

... attack ...

Guy ... you are the one attacking.

You called my work 'CRAP'. You called me a 'naive ignorant'.  You don't 'consider' me a photographer.

Change your behavior and you will be a welcome member of the community ... continue to behave in this manner and you will be challenged.
 

Logged
pegelli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 606



WWW
« Reply #36 on: October 21, 2011, 10:08:04 AM »
ReplyReply

C'mon guys, it seems we're having a bad spell in the coffee corner and maybe we should all look at W. Walkers post in the other thread that got a bit heated: see here. Even though I did not participate there it gave me a big smile when I read it this morning  Grin


Btw Jeremy, I agree with you again. Well said!
Logged

pieter, aka pegelli
pegelli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 606



WWW
« Reply #37 on: October 21, 2011, 10:18:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Now if something different appears in the process (as Pegelli suggested may happen) and if this is still photography, its a completely different discussion which I have no objection to have (it can only be beneficial) but I am not prepared to consider somebody as being a photographer who questions the above fundamental

Theodoros, I think you misunderstood what I said. My reasoning is that these other processes can also result in fine art photography, so I do question these very (in my opinion narrow-minded) principles and I consider many products produced by broader processes both photography and art, so therefore I also consider the people who produce them artists and photographers. For me that is as clear as 1 + 1 = 2.
Logged

pieter, aka pegelli
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #38 on: October 21, 2011, 10:36:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Guy ... you are the one attacking.

You called my work 'CRAP'. You called me a 'naive ignorant'.  You don't 'consider' me a photographer.

Change your behavior and you will be a welcome member of the community ... continue to behave in this manner and you will be challenged.
  


Jesus! Please tell me mr Payne, am I the one that follows you from one thread to another challenging you? (no its you). Am I the one that makes comments like "Utter nonsense" or "Bullshit" without reasoning? (no its you). Have I ever answered to anyone without reasoning my quote? Am I the one that isolates phrases from the rest of the quote just to differentiate the meaning for the purpose of quoting back? (no its you). I would suggest you read "THE CAMERA" by "MR. ANSEL ADAMS", you don't have to read the whole book, ...the FIRST CHAPTER will do! It's called "VISUALIZATION" and I read it when I was very young... It really helps if you take advanced knowledge into account when you find you have a passion on something (like photography for example). After all are you the one that will question who is a welcome member in a community? Are you some kind of police here that will abandon anybody that will question your unreasonable and unjustified statements? You are welcome to challenge me anytime, just do it with reasoning! You may benefit from it as I am sure you have from the start of this thread. Regards,Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
« Last Edit: October 21, 2011, 11:15:25 AM by fotometria gr » Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #39 on: October 21, 2011, 11:13:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Theodoros, I think you misunderstood what I said. My reasoning is that these other processes can also result in fine art photography, so I do question these very (in my opinion narrow-minded) principles and I consider many products produced by broader processes both photography and art, so therefore I also consider the people who produce them artists and photographers. For me that is as clear as 1 + 1 = 2.
"these other processes can result in fine art photography" I think you have to be more specific of the processes. I repeat, "those principles" are not mine (well they are, ...but didn't originate them, I am only quoting them, following them and discussing them), They are the principles of the people that created "photography"..., not "picture taking". The later one is a different subject which if we mix up we will end up with a ...salad, ...not a conversation. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr
P.S. I don't think its rightful for you to call principles of the masters of photography "narrow-minded".
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad