alistair.o
Well-known
Well looking at some of the competition entries you have to wonder
Hi Michael: I love this part quote from the L&CPU web site (Objectives)
"... the advancement of the science and practice of the art of photography..."
The picture would have triumphed with the Union then!
Ha! ain't life and art one and the same eh?
Michael Markey
Veteran
Ha ,spot on.
I well remember the time that I went to the clubs annual barbecue.
It was traditional to have a croquet competition ...my daughter and I won.
It wasn`t a smart move
You may notice that on that web site there is a group who call themselves Wigan ten.
These are considered the elite and you can only join that group by invitation
.Its hilarious except for the mono culture approach to photography that it fosters.
waynec
Established
That really is a nice picture.
Having no knowledge of the amount of manipulation employed, when it reaches a certain level of graphic manipulation it should be called a photo-graphic, not a picture. Pictures are harder to come by. It takes alot of diligent searching, waiting, and money spent to come across natural landscape scenes that stir our senses, and even then it takes a little adjustment to display what our eyes witnessed. Anything beyond levels (or curves) plus a little sharpening is a photo-graphic to me.
Having no knowledge of the amount of manipulation employed, when it reaches a certain level of graphic manipulation it should be called a photo-graphic, not a picture. Pictures are harder to come by. It takes alot of diligent searching, waiting, and money spent to come across natural landscape scenes that stir our senses, and even then it takes a little adjustment to display what our eyes witnessed. Anything beyond levels (or curves) plus a little sharpening is a photo-graphic to me.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
A picture? A painting is a picture. A drawing is a picture. An etching is a picture, etc.
A photograph is an image made by light on a light sensitive surface. There, that's it. If people prefer straight photography, they can call it "straight photography" no need to reorder the whole darn thing just because it is inclusive of something one personally doesn't find appealing.
A photograph is an image made by light on a light sensitive surface. There, that's it. If people prefer straight photography, they can call it "straight photography" no need to reorder the whole darn thing just because it is inclusive of something one personally doesn't find appealing.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
This is mild compared to the controversy that has been brewing in Taiwanese photographic circles recently. Not only were the photos being 'shopped (e.g. sky from Argentina used in landscape of Taiwan), but the photogs 'shopping them were students of the judges. Not just in one competition but in multiple competitions over a substantial period of time.
Michael Markey
Veteran
Ranchu
Veteran
You sound desperate, a comp is not a photo. Writhe around all you want.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
An imitation photograph would be something like a photorealistic painting. Not a photograph made from photographs. That would just be a photograph, definitively.
Ranchu
Veteran
An imitation photograph would be something like a photorealistic painting. Not a photograph made from photographs. That would just be a photograph, definitively.
Right. It's still crap.
Lawrence A.
Established
I use Photoshop mostly for the kinds of adjustments that I usually made in the darkroom through dodging, burning, chemical manipulation, choice of paper, etc. For my personal use I have no problem retouching out an object that intrudes into the frame that I missed while photographing, though I rarely do it. I know my job is not to miss it, but I'm content to catch it on the second go-round if the image is otherwise important to me.
For your own pictures -- for your wall or for sale -- you get to make the rulebook, but competitions have their own. I would probably not drop in a cloud, but as others have pointed out, it was done in the darkroom too, and has a long history. Jerry Uelsmann's creative manipulations are certainly legitimate, unless they were to try to pass themselves off as straight, documentary images -- which would be a tough sell, admittedly.
I enjoy doing fairly straight photography, using photoshop as a pretty traditional darkroom equivalent. But as long as a photo does not misrepresent itself, I'm fine with even extreme photoshop practices. It's been some time since photography could be excepted naively as a direct representation of the world before the lens.
For your own pictures -- for your wall or for sale -- you get to make the rulebook, but competitions have their own. I would probably not drop in a cloud, but as others have pointed out, it was done in the darkroom too, and has a long history. Jerry Uelsmann's creative manipulations are certainly legitimate, unless they were to try to pass themselves off as straight, documentary images -- which would be a tough sell, admittedly.
I enjoy doing fairly straight photography, using photoshop as a pretty traditional darkroom equivalent. But as long as a photo does not misrepresent itself, I'm fine with even extreme photoshop practices. It's been some time since photography could be excepted naively as a direct representation of the world before the lens.