Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
Fotticelli wrote:
I don't get involved in those discussions. There is one other topic that I can think of that evokes so much emotion and that is topics in which models that are too heavy call thin models anorexic.
I think it's just sour grapes from people who can't or are not willing to keep up with the changes in photography. No. Many times it is the problem of the technician mistaking the process for the art itself.
Sometimes it is simply that, after a career spent investing in a technique, their judgement on the value of the image is biased by the techniques used to create the image.
And many times it is that the newer techniques really are inferior in many ways, and these photographers can't see past those blemishes to see the new worlds that have been opened through the advantage the newer techniques offer.
Photographer
American Glamour
Posts: 38813
Detroit, Michigan, US
I am going to add something else to this discussion as well. I think a lot of you great digital artists are selling yourself short in another way.
In the larger, mainstream market, projects are controlled by art directors, not photographers. A photographer is hired to take a picture and then the art department manipulates it and incorporates it into an ad.
So, for example, let's say that a company wanted a picture of a girl on a horse for a bodywash ad. They would hire the photographer to take a picture of a girl on a horse. The art department then would cut the picture off the background, make the horse fly, add wings, sun, a rainbow and water pouring down on her. That would then be incorporated into the ad with copy and, lo and behold, the concept is done.
Those of you who are great with image manipulation have the ability to offer that service to mid-sized and smaller clients who don't have the budget for an art department. It is a great skill. And getting back to the original question, in the end it is the image that makes the art.
Photographer
fstopdreams
Posts: 4300
Chattanooga, Tennessee, US
Sita Mae Edwards wrote:
Be forewarned, this thread is probably going to devolve into a sniping match between old school film photographers who get it right in camera, and the young uppity whippersnappers who think they can just up and use new tools to create images. 
Me personally, I agree with you. Among my favorite photographers are those who don't do any post-production that a darkroom can't accommodate, such as D. Brian Nelson, all the way to people who do so much work in Photoshop that their work is really illustrative art, such as Jeffery Scott. I don't see why it has to be an us vs. them mentality, with one being staunchly defended as the "better" approach.
If the finished image is good, I'm happy, however someone got there. As long as no one quotes the New Testament to support their particular view, I'll live with the sniping.
Photographer
Jeff Fiore
Posts: 9225
Brooklyn, New York, US
Sita Mae Edwards wrote:
Be forewarned, this thread is probably going to devolve into a sniping match between old school film photographers who get it right in camera, and the young uppity whippersnappers who think they can just up and use new tools to create images.
Me personally, I agree with you. Among my favorite photographers are those who don't do any post-production that a darkroom can't accommodate, such as D. Brian Nelson, all the way to people who do so much work in Photoshop that their work is really illustrative art, such as Jeffery Scott. I don't see why it has to be an us vs. them mentality, with one being staunchly defended as the "better" approach.
If the finished image is good, I'm happy, however someone got there. I read an article in American Photographer over a year ago. It was an interview with a photographer (don't recall his name) who used to work with Ansel Adams back in the '80s. He told how they were looking at a print worth $7,000 and a poster of that same print selling for $20. Kidding around, he asked Ansel which he prefers, Ansel answered immediately that he preferred the poster. The photographer was shocked by his answer, he figured that Ansel would argue that the photo was better. Ansel went on to explain that he had so much more control digitally with the poster than he had in the darkroom.
Do you think if Ansel was around today he would be using photoshop? I think so, he was all about controlling the final image.
Photographer
American Glamour
Posts: 38813
Detroit, Michigan, US
Jeff Fiore wrote:
Ansel went on to explain that he had so much more control digitally with the poster than he had in the darkroom.
Do you think if Ansel was around today he would be using photoshop? I think so, he was all about controlling the final image. Ansel Adams also said: "Without a knowledge of light and its reaction to the photographic process one will never achieve the status of an artist" With Photoshop and other contemporary image editing tools, that may not be entirely true today.
We spend too much time dwelling on the difference between a great photographer and a great artist. You can be one, you can be the other or you can be both. But in the end, what you are looking for is a great image.
Photographer
Jeff Fiore
Posts: 9225
Brooklyn, New York, US
Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:
Ansel Adams also said: "Without a knowledge of light and its reaction to the photographic process one will never achieve the status of an artist" With Photoshop and other contemporary image editing tools, that may not be entirely true today.
We spend too much time dwelling on the difference between a great photographer and a great artist. You can be one, you can be the other or you can be both. But in the end, what you are looking for is a great image. I agree. My mantra is "it is all about the light" thats why I love photography, I love playing with light.
Photographer
Habenero Photography
Posts: 1444
Mesa, Arizona, US
Luminos wrote:
Agreed. I used to have a saying back thirty years ago. "The camera always lies." People thought I was getting the quote wrong, and would correct me to say "never". I knew better. I realized that pictures lie as soon as I saw the differences in detail between the first print I made myself and its negative image, back in 1968.
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 17825
El Segundo, California, US
Jeff Fiore wrote:
Do you think if Ansel was around today he would be using photoshop? I think so, he was all about controlling the final image.
Ansel Adams, in "The Negative", 1981 wrote:
I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them.
|
