rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

This topic has been discussed to death, zazendude. Few professional film photos emerge from the stop bath and fixer to go directly to the print lab with no burning/dodging//filter/paper choice adjustments. Digital images adjusted using popular editing apps are the identical process simply done differently.

BebuLamar

I still use film and I love using film but I also know full well that digital PP is something one doesn't have to do if one doesn't want to. Digital PP is also something that most people can learn how to do and can afford to do it. With film if you want to process yourself it requires significant effort and cost and out of reach of most people. We should be happy that digital PP is so accessible to all.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Kinda like acoustic music. Of course, acoustic music is but a part of the vast music spectrum. "Photography" also is a huge spectrum.

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

You didn't capture the actual scene with your Minolta. The world doesn't exist in black and white. You manipulated it, didn't you.

BebuLamar

He didn't manipulated it. First the film manufacturer made the film that way, second all the rest of the manipulation (printing exposure, contrast control etc..) were done by the lab.

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

Sorry, you nit pick arguments don't convince me. His final black and white print is not the same a the original scene. So he can get off his high-and-mighty throne. I won't have any more to say on this since he's probably just trolling anyway.

Bill_de Loc: US

I put up a link to the OP's Instagram snapshots. I guess he decided he didn't want anybody to see them as they are no longer public.

---

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

In the first place your basic premise is flawed as you will never produce ( in your case the camera ) what your eye has seen. Even if this were possible we all perceive colors differently; seems to me there has been hundreds of tangential posts surrounding this topic.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

In your first post, you apparently have struck out.

TheDman Loc: USA

Exactly.

BebuLamar

I never said that his B&W print looks like the real subject nor I said it's not manipulated. But he thought he didn't manipulate because he didn't. He paid for other to manipulate them. This the point I really want to point out that so many feel that you don't have to do anything with film except taking picture with it. That because the rest of the work were done by others for the reason those type of work isn't really DIY stuff. They feel with digital they have to do too much work after taking the pictures but they should appreciate that fact that those work can be done by themselves. And if they want they can always hire someone to do it.
I love film but this is the point where I see great advantage with digital.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

A photograph is a SELECTED image of a moment in time. You could photograph the sky on a clear blue day and call it wednesday! but it would be boring. A photographer seeks out the interesting, they try to be representative of what is there, or the feeling or the wonder of the moment. An amatuers photograph could evoke a memory of a particular moment in their life.A Professional would try to evoke a memory or feeling in many peoples lives.

The image is the final stage of many decissions and processes. It has nothing to do with film or digital camera's. It has little to do with make or model of camera. With film one would have to be quite paticular of place and time, quite underhand in how you add atmosphere or gimmicry when what you imagined you wanted was not there at the time (or ever). Digital post processing may have gained a bad reputation for 'inventing' scenes, But it is no more than an electronic equivalent of firing off a fire extinguisher to add mist or cloud, a Roman Candle to produce the right or additional glints of light etc.

Maybe the problem is that we are subjected to far more images than of old. Competition now requires greater skill in order to be 'successful'. The feeling that 'the old ways' were somehow better if less available. People love the scenic images of victorian people - because they are 'not modern'....one cannot reproduce them therefore they have become unique. No amount of post processing can capture the past - as we imagine it was.

Equally, competition demands failures....the more you lift the bar..the more people cannot compete. The excuse that you cannot use Photoshop as well as others, You dislike abstracts or high definition or whatever simply because you do not understand it's appeal. That what you think is a great image does not stand up as well as others expectations demand. In a big marketplace MORE people are inevitably going to be 'mundane' or deemed 'average'.

We never had 'team photography'. It has and is still all about 'Individuals'. Like any individual endeavour 'what and how well you do' is defined by your choices - subject to the 'market' you are in. The right place but at the wrong moment.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

*groan*

Michael1079 Loc: Indiana

I suppose that I'm missing the point in the OP. One purpose of photography that I read says "Photography is part of the evolution of the human desire to capture and express life." There are countless other ways to define the act of taking a photo but, at its heart, Photography is an art form.

Look at a painting done by Oscar-Claude Monet. The scenes he painted were his mind's eye interpretation - they are not exact representations. I do not believe that a photographer who engages in post processing is attempting to mar or detract from the image captured either on film or in a digital format. The purpose is to enhance the image, it would seem.

leftj Loc: Texas

What a beautiful piece of writing!