Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/24

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Digital darkroom - when isn't it photography?
From: "Joseph Codispoti" <joecodi@clearsightusa.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 14:33:57 -0800
References: <001501c1d368$80212580$633f4d18@gv.shawcable.net> <20020324101044-r01050000-754B7004-3F52-11D6-996A-003065C7DF66-1013-010c@10.0.1.27> <5.1.0.14.2.20020324124629.0e890608@pop.alink.net>

But isn't removing trees and blemishes what we used to do by retouching in
the old days?
Spotone, Marshal Colors, pencils and knives etc. where the tools then.
Is portrait photography not  make believe to some extent by retouching, the
use of soft filters, short lighting, etc?
I remember a student at Brooks asking "how far can we go with Spotone? The
instructor replied: "if you are that good you can draw the entire picture
for me".

My objection to manipulation is placing the statue of  Liberty on the rim of
the Grand Canyon as well as deception in stealing others' work by changing
the image substantially.

Yesterday I  photographed my house to test my new camera. In Photoshop I
removed the newspaper that was still in the driveway. Was that unethical?

Joseph Codispoti


From: "Jim Brick" <jim@brick.org>
> But that's the whole problem as I see it. As soon as you scan a film or
> photograph using a digital camera, the next step is Photoshop before
> printing. Once in Photoshop, well, the urge is there and 99% of the time,
> the print you are printing has been modified to where it is not
> representative of the original scene.
>
> I'm not saying that you, Tina or Ted, do this, but it is, I believe, the
> general practice among a great many of the digital photography folks.
>
> In the darkroom, I do a lot of burning, dodging, contrast mask making,
> bleaching, etc., but I don't remove trees or power poles, move things
> around, change color completely, etc.
>
> I have had a transparency that was damaged, scanned, the damage repaired
in
> Photoshop and then printed from the fixed digital file. But no
manipulation
> was done other than remove the blotches that were caused by dirt that was
> imbedded in the emulsion. I didn't process this transparency!
>
> All of my very large prints are drum scan - LightJet print, but with zero
> manipulation. Nada. Between the scan and the print.
>
> Jim
>
>
> >At 11:17 AM 3/24/02 -0800, you wrote:
> >
> >>I'd also add that, any photographer messing around and changing what
reality
> >>was compared to what he presents to the editor should have his weenie
off!
> >>
> >>Ted Grant Photography Limited
> >>www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant
> At 02:32 PM 3/24/2002 -0500, Tina Manley wrote:
> >....should have his (or her) weenie off.  ;-)
> >
> >Tina
> >
> >
> >Tina Manley, ASMP
> >http://www.tinamanley.com
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Digital darkroom - when isn't it photography?)
Message from Adam Bridge <abridge@idea-processing.com> ([Leica] Digital darkroom - when isn't it photography?)
Message from Jim Brick <jim@brick.org> ([Leica] Re: Digital darkroom - when isn't it photography?)