Mine are always straight out of the camera
Apr 18, 2024 00:10:58 #
Apr 18, 2024 05:33:48 #
Apr 18, 2024 06:40:11 #
Apr 18, 2024 06:46:44 #
Apr 18, 2024 12:45:47 #
About ten years ago we visited San Francisco. While there I took a photo of the painted houses and the city beyond. A UHH frind touched it up a bit and really made it a lot better than it was. Who's to say that what the camera settings are are what's real anyway?
Apr 18, 2024 13:45:37 #
SteveR wrote:
About ten years ago we visited San Francisco. While there I took a photo of the painted houses and the city beyond. A UHH frind touched it up a bit and really made it a lot better than it was. Who's to say that what the camera settings are are what's real anyway?
Well, your god is certainly real and according to you mine is not as real, despite my having attended seminary for a year and having contemplated God throuout my whole life.
Apr 18, 2024 13:58:11 #
Apr 18, 2024 18:45:50 #
srg wrote:
Well, your god is certainly real and according to you mine is not as real, despite my having attended seminary for a year and having contemplated God throuout my whole life.
Since you brought this up in Chit-Chat on a joke about photography I will feel free to respond. Despite going to seminary and contemplating God throughout your life, have you come into a personal relationship with Him? That is possible through Christ and the Holy Spirit.
Apr 18, 2024 18:55:25 #
Apr 18, 2024 21:27:07 #
Apr 19, 2024 11:43:18 #
SteveR wrote:
About ten years ago we visited San Francisco. While there I took a photo of the painted houses and the city beyond. A UHH frind touched it up a bit and really made it a lot better than it was. Who's to say that what the camera settings are are what's real anyway?
I don’t understand why SOOC is the holy grail to some people. If the camera didn’t produce what your eyes saw, there’s nothing wrong with tweaking the image.
Some people cite Ansel Adams as a great photographer because his images were SOOC, which couldn’t be farther from the truth. Most know he spent hours in the darkroom tweaking away. His images, for example, of Yosemite are so beautiful, not because (IMHO) it’s necessarily what he “actually” saw, but what he “wanted” to see. I love his visual interpretation of those scenes.
Apr 19, 2024 11:54:50 #
SteveR wrote:
Since you brought this up in Chit-Chat on a joke about photography I will feel free to respond. Despite going to seminary and contemplating God throughout your life, have you come into a personal relationship with Him? That is possible through Christ and the Holy Spirit.
Or to put it another way, it's your way or the highway.
All those billions of souls, forever condemned to perpetual torture.
Apr 19, 2024 18:02:39 #
Apr 19, 2024 20:34:33 #
srg wrote:
Or to put it another way, it's your way or the highway.
All those billions of souls, forever condemned to perpetual torture.
All those billions of souls, forever condemned to perpetual torture.
Chit-Chat guildelines preclude me from continuing this conversation here. If you really want a reply, send me a p.m.
Apr 20, 2024 10:11:23 #
The title appears to support the SOOC view of photographic philosophy. Ignoring the completely irrelevant subthread I view this as a normal UHH occurrence.
I view SOOC as a personal choice and as such is neither right nor wrong on the whole. For me, it is wrong, but I am not in charge.
I view SOOC as a personal choice and as such is neither right nor wrong on the whole. For me, it is wrong, but I am not in charge.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.