Inserting objects into photos
Nov 26, 2011 17:25:52 #
Chris I hope you follow thru with your idea of including your Dad in the picture. I am in the process of writting my life story and I find by adding pictures from years back ( 1940+) of my father and mother brings the story to life.
Buddy 36
Buddy 36
Nov 26, 2011 17:35:24 #
gessman...As I type this write I look over and see a portiat hanging on the wall of my Father in the center and my brothers on each side that was painted in 1946. My dad being in WWI and my brothers in WWII.
Just below my father's picture I have inserted a head shot of me dressed in my police uniform taken back in 1966. At first glance one would think all of them were painted together. I did not deface the original and can take my picture out if need be.
It means an awful lot to me as they are all gone now except for me. This picture on the side here is not the one I used.
Buddy 36
Just below my father's picture I have inserted a head shot of me dressed in my police uniform taken back in 1966. At first glance one would think all of them were painted together. I did not deface the original and can take my picture out if need be.
It means an awful lot to me as they are all gone now except for me. This picture on the side here is not the one I used.
Buddy 36
Nov 26, 2011 18:17:12 #
artlover wrote:
I believe that all photos should be as taken with ... (show quote)
It is depend on the 'intent' of the photographer who produced the photo.
If the intent is to report the subject or event, then the photo is a record needs to be true to whatever it suppose to report or portrait as in recording the photographer should be invisible.
If the intent is to paint a picture or tell a story, then the photo came out the camera need not be the final product and the photographer's feeling and expression are the most important elements in the photo.
Photo is only a medium and we all agree that the medium can be used differently by a reporter to report something or an artist to express something.
Therefore I do not see any argument or conflict whether one should stay true to what the camera sees or what the artist sees!
Nov 26, 2011 18:44:27 #
johndodd
Loc: Delaware, USA
....My view is that art is art, no matter what is done to arrive at the final stage.....It will either be aesthetic to the viewers eye or they turn it away....
...Rock on with your imaginative bad-selves!!!
...Rock on with your imaginative bad-selves!!!
Nov 26, 2011 18:59:58 #
Nov 26, 2011 19:01:42 #
I think it is a very nice idea..there are times when it makes for a better photo..maybe not from a purist view..but from someone who the inclusion would be meaningful to..a very nice touch.
Nov 26, 2011 20:53:49 #
When I worked for a newspaper as a graphic artist it was very clear what we could and could not do with photoshop. Now, I can and do do whatever I want with a photo, but I always indicate that it was 'shopped, if it was. Coming from a photojournalist background I am having a great time with the freedom to manipulate photos to MY liking. When I signed up with deviantart, I did so as a photographer and photomanipulator. I am also in awe of the people who can do fantasy stuff because they have the talent and skills that I don't. (Like being able to draw)
manipulated
photo
guess
Nov 26, 2011 21:27:01 #
If something is art how can there be fixed rules?
If there are rules, is it art?
Is photography art? Can it be?
If there are rules, is it art?
Is photography art? Can it be?
Nov 26, 2011 21:35:40 #
To me, it all depends on what you are trying to do.
Obviously, if you are presenting something as realistic and you are dinking with it, there's an ethical issue. But, there are lots of purposes that might be more important than an accurate realistic rendition of the exact physical reality at the moment the shutter was pressed.
I'd like to note that this isn't new with digital photography and photoshop-like tools. Many of those same things were done with film, just using different methods.
Obviously, if you are presenting something as realistic and you are dinking with it, there's an ethical issue. But, there are lots of purposes that might be more important than an accurate realistic rendition of the exact physical reality at the moment the shutter was pressed.
I'd like to note that this isn't new with digital photography and photoshop-like tools. Many of those same things were done with film, just using different methods.
Nov 26, 2011 23:41:02 #
Take away all manipulation and you put Hollywood out of business. Are you creating art or trying to make a historical record? To put Aunt Laura at a crime scene with a smoking gun in her hand is clearly dishonest, but how about adding a pine tree to a lake shore? Nobody has to like my pictures but me, and if I like how they look on my wall then I'm happy to have all the tools I can use.
I found the sage brush about five feet from the wagon. It was just lying there looking lonesome. Was it dishonest to pick it up and place it by the wagon wheel?
I found the sage brush about five feet from the wagon. It was just lying there looking lonesome. Was it dishonest to pick it up and place it by the wagon wheel?
Nov 26, 2011 23:42:18 #
Nov 27, 2011 06:53:10 #
Paw Paw Bill
Loc: d
forbescat wrote:
LOL, nope...looks very natural.
I agree and am not opposed to that in its context.
I know buckwheat was just having fun with pic #3, it's so obvious that it stinks if it were presented otherwise.
The problem is that there are those who do this and then present is as a finished product. It's embarrassing to the profession. Buckwheat, keep that photo between us in the forum and don't let it out. Others may think that is the state of the art and laugh us out of Dodge City.
Nov 27, 2011 07:16:26 #
Nov 27, 2011 11:45:56 #
Paw Paw Bill wrote:
I know buckwheat was just having fun with pic #3, it's so obvious that it stinks if it were presented otherwise.
The problem is that there are those who do this and then present is as a finished product. It's embarrassing to the profession. Buckwheat, keep that photo between us in the forum and don't let it out. Others may think that is the state of the art and laugh us out of Dodge City.
I know buckwheat was just having fun with pic #3, it's so obvious that it stinks if it were presented otherwise.
The problem is that there are those who do this and then present is as a finished product. It's embarrassing to the profession. Buckwheat, keep that photo between us in the forum and don't let it out. Others may think that is the state of the art and laugh us out of Dodge City.
Aww, you're no fun. Bill. I was hoping he'd take them on the road. Put them in Times Square or in front of the pyramids. Maybe on the tarmac at one of those air shows. Sort of a photographic reality show. ;)
Nov 27, 2011 16:22:54 #
Yes Mark, I recall that picture and wasn't fooled even when it first came thru my e-mail site. It was of course meant to have been funny but I see no humor in such.
Buddy 36
Buddy 36
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.