Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/05/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]So, if I understand this correctly, in the past image manipulation was better accepted? Op 13-mei-06, om 00:06 heeft B. D. Colen het volgende geschreven: > No, their weren't. It's wild to go through picture libraries at > places such > as the Wash Post or Nyt and see what the "art" department did > photos. But > with the advent of digital, and the realization of how radically, and > easily, reality can be altered, standard have become much more > stringent. > > ...... Original Message ....... > On Fri, 12 May 2006 23:48:37 +0200 Philippe Orlent > <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> wrote: >> Every photographer should have been at least once in his life in a >> real darkroom, even if only to look at somebody else doing >> everything. I agree with you completely, B.D. >> But I wonder, since not having it lived consciously myself, were >> there similar discussions about truth -with even simple darkroom >> techniques such as dodging and burning- back then, too? >> If applied masterfully, they can change the content or perception of >> a photograph as thoroughly as PS does nowadays. >> >> >> Op 12-mei-06, om 23:28 heeft B. D. Colen het volgende geschreven: >> >>> It doesn't just apply to journalism though - it's beginning to be a >>> lost >>> reference point for all photography. The average kid today may >>> never have >>> been in a darkroom. Think about it - what the hell do "burn" and >>> "dodge" >>> mean - on the PS tools - if you've never done real darkroom >>> work? :-) >>> >>> >>> On 5/12/06 1:38 PM, "Philippe Orlent" <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I agree. If it's about journalism. >>>> >>>> >>>> Op 12-mei-06, om 19:34 heeft B. D. Colen het volgende geschreven: >>>> >>>>> You think you're joking, Philippe - just a couple of hours ago >>>>> I was >>>>> skimming a column in a national press photographer's association >>>>> magazine in >>>>> which a photography teacher at, as I recall, the University of >>>>> Arkansas said >>>>> that they are now two years past the last class of graduates to >>>>> have ever >>>>> spent time in a real darkroom. And that, he said, begins to raise >>>>> havoc with >>>>> what has been the standard ethical guideline regarding the use of >>>>> photoshop >>>>> - only do to the image in photoshop what you would normally have >>>>> done in a >>>>> darkroom; or only except from a photoshopped image what you would >>>>> have >>>>> accepted from the darkroom. But if today's photographers think a >>>>> darkroom is >>>>> their bedroom with the lights off.... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 5/12/06 1:11 PM, "Philippe Orlent" <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dodging? That's the 7th down from the 2nd row of 'tools', right? >>>>>> >>>>>> Just adding a ;-) to be sure. >>>>>> >>>>>> Op 12-mei-06, om 19:05 heeft Rei Shinozuka het volgende >>>>>> geschreven: >>>>>> >>>>>>> it's a very handsome photo otherwise, maybe dodging the >>>>>>> surrounding >>>>>>> areas would rescue the image. (doesn't the phrase "dodging" >>>>>>> today sound almost quaint?) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i have noticed that something approaching 100% of real-life "bad >>>>>>> bokeh" >>>>>>> examples are of vegetation; mostly tree branches or leaves. so >>>>>>> keep >>>>>>> those bad bokesters away from wildlife! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -rei >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 5/12/06 12:39 PM, "Nathan Wajsman" <nathan@nathanfoto.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well Daniel, with such subject matter one can tolerate many >>>>>>>>> things...but >>>>>>>>> that bokeh is indeed not very attractive. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nathan >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Daniel Ridings wrote: >>>>>>>>>> A lot of people puke at my Rolleicord's bokeh (under certain >>>>>>>>>> circumstances ... close focus, pretty much wide-open). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.dlridings.se/gallery/v/informal/ >>>>>>>>>> v15-0002-43264.jpg.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Daniel >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Rei Shinozuka shino@panix.com >>>>>>> Ridgewood, New Jersey >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>>>>> information >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>>>> information >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>>> information >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>> information >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > ___ > Sent from handheld device. Please forgive any typos or spelling > errors. > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >