mikelc Posted November 16, 2008 Author Share #101 Posted November 16, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...this last comment by shootist (can't figure out how to quote here...sorry) sums it up for me...we are in a new era of picture making and the digital darkroom on the computer gives one much more control than the chemical darkroom ever did and it's only the beginning...no one would say to an painter about a work that it was interesting but it takes away from the 'sketch' that started it again not sure what even to call it...I don't lke post processing even because it sounds like just correcting a raw file rather than building a picture from it which is what i always feel i'm trying to do....what i like about the m8 files is how pure they are and how much info they give you to work with....but ultimately the bottom line is the final product...does it work or not?... if it doesnt than no amount of fancy 'pp' will matter... mike Mike Cetta | Fine Art Photographer Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 16, 2008 Posted November 16, 2008 Hi mikelc, Take a look here A Grand Prize for me and my M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
farnz Posted November 16, 2008 Share #102 Posted November 16, 2008 ... (can't figure out how to quote here...sorry) ... Hit the red Quote button at the bottom right of each post, Mike. Pete. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted November 16, 2008 Share #103 Posted November 16, 2008 SNIP again not sure what even to call it...I don't lke post processing even because it sounds like just correcting a raw file rather than building a picture from it which is what i always feel i'm trying to do.... after processing a RAW file is 'cooked' surely. So the process is cooking Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted November 17, 2008 Share #104 Posted November 17, 2008 MANIPULATION I was talking to an artist the other day that felt guilty because she used PS to enhance some of her art work. I re-assured her that PS cannot replace talent and artistic vision. I don't like that word, MANIPULAION, it implies cheating of some sort. When people ask me if I manipulate a print I simply tell them that I do post-processing editing to achieve my own personal vision as Adam's did. The myth prevails that Anselm Adams miraculously got the prints he did, simply because he knew how to take a proper exposure. Cheers, Wilfredo Benitez-Rivera Photography Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted November 18, 2008 Share #105 Posted November 18, 2008 The myth prevails that Anselm Adams miraculously got the prints he did, simply because he knew how to take a proper exposure. Cheers, Wilfredo Benitez-Rivera Photography I remember looking at some of Ansel Adam's original straight prints and the evolutionary process of print manipulation over time as part of the Ansel at 100 collection. What struck me was how relatively ordinary most of his original images were prior to his artistic print work. It was also interesting to notice how over time his printing of certain images became less subtle and more and more high contrast. Ansel would be one of the first people in line to be producing 'manipulated' prints digitally. (if you want to use that term). Btw Wilfredo - nice gallery - quite thought provoking. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted December 11, 2008 Share #106 Posted December 11, 2008 Mike, I started to experiment with Color Efex Pro. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/71965-simple-blown-away.html#post746073 Thanks for the introduction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted December 11, 2008 Share #107 Posted December 11, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... Ansel Adam's ... also interesting to notice how over time his printing of certain images became less subtle and more and more high contrast ... It's possible that this is the effect of the more modern lenses he used in his later career. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted December 11, 2008 Share #108 Posted December 11, 2008 There is a different "painterly" treatment here, using different tools. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-post-processing-forum/67568-mexican-dancers-painting.html Both sets of treatments are really fascinating. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikelc Posted December 11, 2008 Author Share #109 Posted December 11, 2008 Wilfredo, ...pretty cool right?...stay with it cause it's a limitless tool for working with color ...also thanks to Brent? for giving me the tip for the Digital Photo Pro creativity contest. I submitted the pic and was informed yesterday that it was picked for the grand prize there as well.. mike Mike Cetta | Fine Art Photographer Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted December 11, 2008 Share #110 Posted December 11, 2008 Wilfredo, ...pretty cool right?...stay with it cause it's a limitless tool for working with color ...also thanks to Brent? for giving me the tip for the Digital Photo Pro creativity contest. I submitted the pic and was informed yesterday that it was picked for the grand prize there as well.. mike Mike Cetta | Fine Art Photographer Mike, That's great news! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted December 12, 2008 Share #111 Posted December 12, 2008 ...also thanks to Brent? for giving me the tip for the Digital Photo Pro creativity contest. I submitted the pic and was informed yesterday that it was picked for the grand prize there as well.. mike Mike Cetta | Fine Art Photographer Mike--That's fantastic. Congratulations again, and well deserved. There are all sorts of contests out there and I have a feeling your image could win a bunch of them. Make sure you retain all your rights, but I'm guessing you already know that. Cheers, Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
judybabinski Posted December 12, 2008 Share #112 Posted December 12, 2008 Really great shot! So many elements all working together so well. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted December 12, 2008 Share #113 Posted December 12, 2008 ....... Make sure you retain all your rights......, I've been thinking the same thing throughout this thread. 'Rights Grabs' are the norm with competitions. .............. Chris Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andit Posted December 12, 2008 Share #114 Posted December 12, 2008 Hi Mike, You most rightly deserved to win that competition. This image is stunning, Congratulations. Thanks for sharing with us and please post some more. Andreas Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammitsboel Posted December 12, 2008 Share #115 Posted December 12, 2008 ...was fortunate enough to win the grand prize for this shot from the Summer Streets photo competition run by nyc dot for the event from this past august...the shot was taken with the m8 and 35 mm cron...just showing off i guess and plug for this incredible camera Thanks for posting! I feel that I can't see your shot from all the "noise". Best Regards Henrik Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted December 12, 2008 Share #116 Posted December 12, 2008 Mike, I started to experiment with Color Efex Pro. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/71965-simple-blown-away.html#post746073 Thanks for the introduction. I just downloaded a trial version. What tools are you using to get these effects? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted December 12, 2008 Share #117 Posted December 12, 2008 Does that include the Bible Belt, Brad? Definitely so, Pete, fortunately or unfortunately. Just like everywhere else, there's a lot of hypocrisy there. But the point is well taken. We do tend to be a bit schizophrenic as a nation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted December 12, 2008 Share #118 Posted December 12, 2008 Definitely so, Pete, fortunately or unfortunately. Just like everywhere else, there's a lot of hypocrisy there. But the point is well taken. We do tend to be a bit schizophrenic. Bible belt--isn't that what they use to whip sinners? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted December 12, 2008 Share #119 Posted December 12, 2008 Mike, the picture is a marvel. I'm not a fan of New York City, but your image makes me want to get up and go there. Congratulations on the double-win! And thanks for making us think. You've once again brought up the matter that E Puts, Newsweek, The Online Photographer and a lot of others have addressed: With digital, photography has changed. Our previous concept of photography is dead, though we're just beginning to see that. Thanks for the post. You've got a lot to be proud of. Great eye, great talent, great craftsmanship! Oh, and aren't you glad you don't live in a country that requires a model release from every recognizable person in the picture for it to be publishable? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGW Posted December 12, 2008 Share #120 Posted December 12, 2008 ...Nevertheless, I disagree with the above generalization... Bill Parsons, My response was not a generalization: the unique attribute of photography is that with it you can capture a moment of reality; a record of wherever you are that's real and belongs to you. You selectively press the shutter and it's done. For me that is where the satisfaction begins, and where the art (if art exists in photography at all) is created. Every other visual art form enables you to interpret your visual interests or awareness with hindsight, and the impact of interest, for everyone to enjoy and hopefully appreciate, is created at this later stage. Hi, have you ever read the Ansel Adams books? His prints were the most manipulated darkroom prints I have ever heard about.When I shot film, particularly Kodachrome printed onto Cibachrome in my darkroom, the amount of manipulation needed to get a print that was not rubbish was very time consuming and required years of experience to develop the skill. To get the look a photographer wants -any- manipulation of colour and contrast is fine by me. If I take issue with manipulation of photographs it is only where dishonest people add, subtract or heavily modify a photograph in order to mislead. Hi frank_dernie, No, I've never read Ansel Adams books but know something of his work. I never had much interest in the results he achieved with their often over-dramatic interpretation. One that always comes to mind is a shot of what I think were very vertical silver birch tree trunks with very white barks and dark background behind them. Far too contrasty and unrealistic looking for my taste. But by this I am not saying that I am right and everyone else is wrong, and as I said in my first post, that would be stupid. I'm just giving my opinion, which is what we all do on this forum, and the cross section of opinions on the forum is what makes reading here often very interesting, and sometimes even educational! We all do photography for our own reasons and all are equally valid. I've also done Cibachrome printing in my darkroom, though usually from Fujichrome film, so I know how time consuming that can be. In the 90s all magazine colour work was done with transparency film, and before scanners this was the only way to keep some images before Red Staring the films to London. All conventional wet darkroom printing is slightly hit and miss anyway with the dodging and burning-in before the waiting time for the developed result. That was the only way to do things back then, and can't really be compared to the digital manipulation available today which takes the image into different territory altogether. mike, thank you for posting your original 'straight' image; it's a very interesting capture. Your digitally manipulated version does give it something else and a 'difference' which would appeal to a larger audience including the majority of judges who would react to its striking digital impact. As I said in my earlier post, I actually like the result that you created, and this is my dilemma: the line is becoming further blurred between photography and other visual art forms. Results available from digital manipulation will capture a lot of people's interests and direct them to photography and this will be their reason and interest in photography. Others who have been doing photography for years might also take on this digital aspect and it become their main interest. There's nothing wrong with any of this. ...and Imants, I always enjoy your quips and occasional (I'm sure friendly) little digs at people on this forum. Your remarks are often very amusing and entertaining! Your pictures are interesting too...but so be it. ...and MIKE, Thanks. Wow! I think I've now replied to everyone! Jeffrey. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.