Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Is that so wrong?
From: feli2 at earthlink.net (Feli)
Date: Sat Feb 26 10:59:24 2005
References: <r02010400-1038-50C6CA2A882311D9ACD8000393B59F78@[192.168.1.101]>
 
On Feb 26, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Kenneth Frazier wrote:
>
> I've noticed that many of the local photo shows I've been to recently
> feature "photo"s(?) that are apparently "graphics"
> images....Photoshopped, or something.  One of my artist friends who
> attends with me views them with puzzlement, as do I.
>
> No offense to any of you who prefer the "photo-graphics" approach.
>
> Ken Frazier

I agree. If a shot has been heavily modified in PS, it should probably 
be
labeled as such. I don't think I would still consider it a straight 
'photograph".
Dodging and burning is one thing, but once you go beyond that, it's a 
whole
different thing. Didn't they used to call such work a photomontage?

feli


________________________________________________________
feli2@earthlink.net                     2 + 2 = 4                      
www.elanphotos.com
Replies: Reply from kennybod at mac.com (Kenneth Frazier) ([Leica] Is that so wrong?)
Reply from kennybod at mac.com (Kenneth Frazier) ([Leica] Is that so wrong?)
Reply from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] Is that so wrong?)
 In reply to: Message from kennybod at mac.com (Kenneth Frazier) ([Leica] Is that so wrong?)