Fake photos
Apr 19, 2019 12:10:21 #
I know of an artist who does photos placing an animal in a beautiful setting-also one who places a missing person in a group setting.I object to when this is done with photos for sale as original art such as wolves pasted into a setting and not disclosed as such. It is fairly easy to accomplish I guess, but is misleading. We are in a new era in photography.
Apr 19, 2019 12:13:26 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
There are different kinds of photography. Journalistic/documentary , which gives what the eye and camera sees. Then there is art that offers an interpretation of what the mind sees.
Think of journalism. One form reports what actually occurred, and another form reports what the journalist wants it to be.
If you play golf there is a similarity, how may strokes did you take vs how many strokes you thought it should have taken you.
Apr 19, 2019 12:15:04 #
Oly Guy wrote:
I know of an artist who does photos placing an animal in a beautiful setting-also one who places a missing person in a group setting.I object to when this is done with photos for sale as original art such as wolves pasted into a setting and not disclosed as such. It is fairly easy to accomplish I guess, but is misleading. We are in a new era in photography.
I don't get it. A photographer wishes to photograph an animal and rather than just photographing it in a cage, he puts the animal in a nice setting. What is the objection? We put people in studio settings all the time why not critters?
Apr 19, 2019 12:23:19 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
Because everyone to his/hers own!
Apr 19, 2019 12:27:23 #
Rich1939 wrote:
I don't get it. A photographer wishes to photograph an animal and rather than just photographing it in a cage, he puts the animal in a nice setting. What is the objection? We put people in studio settings all the time why not critters?
I think Oly Guy was saying that the animal was postprocessed into a nice setting, i.e. it was cut out of one photo and pasted into another with a nice setting.
Apr 19, 2019 12:32:48 #
I feel it's a matter of degree-I remove things that were obstructions such as telephone wires signs etc. Professional Photographers go to great efforts to shoot animals in their native settings -I try to eliminate distractions at the zoo etc. But adding is different in my thoughts -let people know what is being done.Especially when selling the Art-as true to life.Mountains behind central park New York, with a beautiful moon where it doesn't exist is just wrong.I feel creative art should be obvious such as in abstract styles and creative art efforts. When I shoot Infra Red Landscapes it's obvious I am changing trees etc.
Apr 19, 2019 12:52:54 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
I've seen many , like you, bring up this subject.
Now you sit back and watch what happens.
It will go on , hot, for a while and then dye out.
Nothing will become of all the quibbles.
Charles
Apr 19, 2019 13:14:56 #
Apr 19, 2019 13:54:04 #
DirtFarmer wrote:
I think Oly Guy was saying that the animal was postprocessed into a nice setting, i.e. it was cut out of one photo and pasted into another with a nice setting.
Ok now I get it.
Apr 19, 2019 13:55:31 #
Oly Guy wrote:
I feel it's a matter of degree-I remove things tha... (show quote)
I misinterpreted your comment. Apologies!
Apr 19, 2019 14:09:24 #
stanco wrote:
Why distort what the camera sees? .Why not look at what nature display.
Understand the question, but are you making a statement, or just trying to reopen a topic that has no solution.
Even the camera and various lens/filters distort what exists in a natural state. Even you eyes will change what exists, depending on light source, and several other factors.
So, my hunch is, you are just having fun with such an inane question. Enjoy yourself.
Apr 19, 2019 14:17:27 #
Pablo8 wrote:
Are you trying to compete with Chris T. ?? I, along with other posters on this thread, are awaiting your replies.
What has THIS Topic, got to do with me, Pablo?
My shots are always SOOC … I don't mess with 'em …
Apr 19, 2019 14:17:27 #
Pablo8 wrote:
Are you trying to compete with Chris T. ?? I, along with other posters on this thread, are awaiting your replies.
What has THIS Topic, got to do with me, Pablo?
My shots are always SOOC … I don't mess with 'em …
Apr 19, 2019 14:48:13 #
Apr 19, 2019 14:51:04 #
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The artist creates beauty (or his concept of it). Abstract expressionist artists create what they perceive as beauty. Why limit the photographer from expressing his own personal idea of the beauty in a scene?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.