Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Wow ... you think you take good photos and then ....

Options
2»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 532 ✭✭✭Turquoise Hexagon Sun


    slipperyox wrote: »
    A photographer is a custodian of records.

    Documenting something that happened.

    In 20 years time, people will look back at their family portrait, where the wife blinking was replaced with another shot, and the child looking away was replaced with another shot. In other words, a picture of an event/moment that never happened.;)

    I respect your point, even if in jest, but for every "enhanced" or "rendered reality" moment, there is always the original raw file and plenty of raw photography.

    I don't alter my photos too much but I do respect people being artfully able to present a very real looking Photoshop composition. To me it's like a fake documentary or mockumentary. If it fools some people to thinking it's real, that's great. It's not easy to do. And it's all well and good being able to use Photoshop but you have to have a good eye for detail, and you can't really teach "taste." So if someone can make a tasteful, realistic-looking composite using Photoshop, well done.

    Having said that, I would prefer that photographers using these photo compositions were transparent about it. Because it's kind of unfair on people that use advanced techniques in setting up lighting, composing the scene before the photo is taken. It's the difference between a skilled musician playing original music and producer composing music out of samples. Both take skills but one taking a very different means.


Advertisement