Check out Close Up Photography section of our forum.
What does SOOC really mean anymore?
Oct 24, 2019 10:45:06 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
A true masterpiece doesn't tell you anything about the camera used.
...or what processing was done.
Matter of fact, I don't care about either, just the way the image looks.
(No extra brownie points for SOOC.)
Oct 24, 2019 10:52:02 #
srt101fan wrote:
But, but...the camera is a computer!? 😕
Yup, a mini with dedicated software.
Oct 24, 2019 10:54:43 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
On UHH it means there will be 15 pages of meaningless arguments within 24 hours and nobody will be a better photographer when it's over. Sorry, Phil 🤗
It's your image, do what you like to it:
https://digital-photography-school.com/its-your-image-do-what-you-like-to-it/
What's important in a photograph and what isn't:
https://photographylife.com/whats-important-in-a-photograph-and-what-isnt
.
It's your image, do what you like to it:
https://digital-photography-school.com/its-your-image-do-what-you-like-to-it/
What's important in a photograph and what isn't:
https://photographylife.com/whats-important-in-a-photograph-and-what-isnt
.
Check out Bridge Camera Show Case section of our forum.
Oct 24, 2019 11:18:46 #
crazycarol wrote:
to me, an amateur, looking at some photos and thin... (show quote)
Bingo! You got to a core issue here!
I think in part it's a generational issue...
It's not necessarily bad/wrong to manipulate the hell out of a digital image. But us oldtimers remember looking with awe at spectacular photos (e.g., huge moon over the Lincoln Memorial) and admiring the skill and perseverance of the photographer who CAPTURED such an image.
Today, some of us don't know how to react to an image, don't know what to admire - photographic skill or computer wizardry? There's no denying that great artistry can go into photo composites, and Linda, among others on this forum, has clearly demonstrated this. But it is a different kind of artistry and some of us old folks might feel a little cheated when we find out that much of what we once would have admired as photographic expertise is actually, at least partially, a computer creation. Artistic, skillful, admirable? Yes, but different.....
Oct 24, 2019 11:22:30 #
srt101fan wrote:
...
...
Today, some of us don't know how to react to an image, don't know what to admire - photographic skill or computer wizardry?
...
...
...
Today, some of us don't know how to react to an image, don't know what to admire - photographic skill or computer wizardry?
...
Computer wizardry would be darkroom wizardry years ago.
Oct 24, 2019 11:24:15 #
No artist ever sees things only as the camera would. If he did, he would cease to be an artist.
Oct 24, 2019 11:29:02 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
No artist ever sees things only as the camera would. If he did, he would cease to be an artist.
The mind is a powerful thing.Oct 24, 2019 11:30:43 #
Longshadow wrote:
Computer wizardry would be darkroom wizardry years ago.
I believe there was much less manipulation in the old days, especially when it comes to things like composites. But there were always exceptions....
Oct 24, 2019 11:31:25 #
Blenheim Orange wrote:
JPEG is far better than full frame, and you should always use a lens hood rather than a tripod.
Mike
Mike
My crop sensor prefers a monopod and polarizer.
Oct 24, 2019 11:31:39 #
srt101fan wrote:
I believe there was much less manipulation in the old days, especially when it comes to things like composites. But there were always exceptions....
MUCH more work intensive back then!
Oct 24, 2019 11:33:08 #
Listen to Linda from Maine. If you are not doing this for a living, enjoy what you are doing. If you like the results, it's a good photo. Who cares what anyone else calls it.
Check out Street Photography section of our forum.
Oct 24, 2019 11:34:09 #
Longshadow wrote:
MUCH more work intensive back then!
Work intensive, absolutely, but not in terms of the degree to which the image was changed...
Oct 24, 2019 11:41:05 #
Oct 24, 2019 11:43:01 #
dborengasser wrote:
Which of the previous six pages of comments are you agreeing with? I can't argue with that!
If you click the "quote reply" button directly below the post you are responding to, the mystery will be solved
Oct 24, 2019 11:45:34 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Therein is, I believe, the OP's point. It is nonsensical to differentiate between in-camera adjustments (now that there are so many available) and what the photographer does in pp.
OP here. Yes Linda, that is my point.
To my mind, it is the image that counts, not how you got there. However, I admit I get a great deal of satisfaction with getting it 'just right' at capture. It is sort of like cooking a meal. You get the best ingredients you can, but it is how you prepare and present the food that really matters. Sometimes you make apple pie and sometimes you just eat the apple. I tend to look on recipes as 'suggestions' not instructions. I can't heat a can of soup without making it my own.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Close Up Photography section of our forum.