Fake photos
Apr 18, 2019 04:55:45 #
Apr 18, 2019 05:05:20 #
Apr 18, 2019 05:13:02 #
Apr 18, 2019 05:53:51 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
It's not a case of what nature displays - it's what man has spoilt - for example, bins everywhere, fences everywhere, telegraph poles and cables everywhere, roads everywhere, litter everywhere, the destroying of our forests, the poaching of our animals, the poisoning of our atmosphere - shall I go on?
If you want to see nature in the raw, you should be thanking photographers who remove such wonderful displays of man's ingenuity at spoiling our world. Man's "advancement" is not on a linear scale - it is more on a logarithmic scale - which gives us about 60 years before armageddon.
Apr 18, 2019 06:00:09 #
Apr 18, 2019 06:06:42 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
Let me know when the camera sees what the eye does exactly. Please take off your rose colored glasses.
Apr 18, 2019 06:13:39 #
Delderby wrote:
It's not a case of what nature displays - it's wha... (show quote)
I think your off topic, for a photography forum
Apr 18, 2019 06:16:06 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
Many photos are documentary. Some are meant to see what the photographer sees. Some are meant to see what the mind sees as a possibility. Some are art. Some are just fun.
Apr 18, 2019 06:21:01 #
The camera is a tool of the artist. Asking about fake photos or photos not 'distorted' by the camera is like asking why does the artist distort what the paint brush sees?
Apr 18, 2019 06:30:21 #
Apr 18, 2019 06:42:11 #
Apr 18, 2019 06:47:17 #
DAN Phillips wrote:
SOOC is always best! It's not fake or make believe!
Oh really, It appears you don't shoot RAW.
Apr 18, 2019 06:51:00 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
Better question - why not?
An artist of any genre - even performance - will interpret life as he/she sees fit. The beauty is always in the interpretation. I think the photography world - especially the fine art side of things - is a much better place because of the artist's interpretation.
If you do crime scenes, photo journalism and some other kinds of documentary photography, then it would be misleading to "distort".
And as Haydon so accurately points out - the camera NEVER records with anything near perfection.
I was out shooting egrets yesterday - in sunny, contrasty light - it is impossible to get any camera, no matter how advanced, to handle the contrast range between the middle tone backgrounds and the bright white of the bird's plumage.
The answer to your question is contained in the comparison of the two images below.
My suggestion is to go out and shoot challenging natural subjects using your "no distortion" suggestion, and see if you can come up with anything reasonable.
.
Apr 18, 2019 07:14:36 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
Many artists never paint what they see, they Interpret what they see. I look upon photography as an art. I like to make an image what I would like it to be. But, that's just me.
Apr 18, 2019 07:20:48 #
Pablo8
Loc: Nottingham UK.
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
Are you trying to compete with Chris T. ?? I, along with other posters on this thread, are awaiting your replies.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.