68degrees
Well-known
So there I was, at the beach with my dad taking pictures and being happy as usual. A couple walks up and the female starts snapping pics with her DSL. He husband indicating potential shots for her. He says heres a nice shot of the sunset and here comes some birds too. She says, I dont like birds in my pics. He says, oh its ok you can always remove them dont worry.
I looked up from the viewfinder of my TLR and smiled. I looked at the man and slightly feigned ignorance and said "Remove birds"? and he said well ya, just erase them in photoshop.. I said laughing "oh.. dont get me started" and laughed a bit. She smiled and said softly "oh no". That was it. Her in her world and me in mine. But the dialogue was interesting none the less.
Erasing birds.... nice.
I looked up from the viewfinder of my TLR and smiled. I looked at the man and slightly feigned ignorance and said "Remove birds"? and he said well ya, just erase them in photoshop.. I said laughing "oh.. dont get me started" and laughed a bit. She smiled and said softly "oh no". That was it. Her in her world and me in mine. But the dialogue was interesting none the less.
Erasing birds.... nice.
DamenS
Well-known
She's the photographer. If she doesn't like birds in her pictures that is her prerogative. If her partner suggests removing them in Photoshop, I don't see the problem with that. What is valid for one is not valid for all (and visa versa). For them, erasing birds IS "nice", and fine and valid and it doesn't render them somehow inferior. Now if they tied you down and tried to erase birds from YOUR photos, that would be an interesting post !
paradoxbox
Well-known
her artwork, she can do what she wants.
that does raise a point which i believe is being discussed in another thread - the difference between artwork and photography. once you change the photo far beyond the originally recorded image it no longer fits the official definition of the word photograph anymore, but it might still be a beautiful art piece (and arguably photograph if you use the word loosely)
that does raise a point which i believe is being discussed in another thread - the difference between artwork and photography. once you change the photo far beyond the originally recorded image it no longer fits the official definition of the word photograph anymore, but it might still be a beautiful art piece (and arguably photograph if you use the word loosely)
sparrow6224
Well-known
Actually if they tied you down and did some other stuff that would be an even more interesting post.
jtm6
Well-known
Her: "Let's wait a minute for the birds to leave."
Him: "No, silly! Take the picture now. You can spend 15 minutes editing it with Photoshop later."
Him: "No, silly! Take the picture now. You can spend 15 minutes editing it with Photoshop later."
Messsucherkamera
Established
dave lackey
Veteran
This could have been so much more interesting with a title like that....
But cool, nonetheless. Thanks for posting...
But cool, nonetheless. Thanks for posting...
jwc57
Well-known
I dropped by the local camera store yesterday to pickup a Polaroid back for a Mamiya...gift from the owner. While looking at the used camera section, the two twenty-somethings behind the counter and I talked. I mentioned that I still shot film and wanted to try paper negatives with my Graphic View.
I got the "roll eyes" look. It left me with the impression they thought I was trying to be "hip"....or stuck in the past.
(The C220 they had in the used section was tempting....well, so was the black OM-1. But the wife has put her foot down on me buying anymore film cameras. )
I got the "roll eyes" look. It left me with the impression they thought I was trying to be "hip"....or stuck in the past.
(The C220 they had in the used section was tempting....well, so was the black OM-1. But the wife has put her foot down on me buying anymore film cameras. )
68degrees
Well-known
we were like that once werent we? haha