Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
ruining photography.... debate?

i was inspired to write this because of a recent journal i wrote on what is popular here on DA, i was also dared to make it a news article ......so always being up for a challenge i've made it a news article......intrigued?.....if you class yourself as a photographer then you should be.

Here is the very firmly tongue in cheek journal i wrote ....although many a true word spoke in jest.......so they say?
:D
www.sassaputzin.deviantart.com…
as said it covers what is popular here on D.A. especially that that is classed as photography... It was also inspired by a collective feeling that is out there relating to what is popular here on our beloved D.A. in the photography category. This collective feeling comes from people i watch and people that watch me.

I think the general 'feeling' is that what is appreciated as photography quite often has probably rather stepped into the realms of photo manipulation. There is no problem with photo manipulation and i know i am in danger of sounding like a photography snob i feel it only becomes a problem when well respected 'p photographers' mislead there many watchers by alluding to have taken a photo as opposed to their image being a photo manipulation.

Obviously this deceit can have a retrograding effect on the aspirations and achievements of an impressionable youth. Much of this debate will also encompass hdr and its over, and poor use to create an image that is more accurately categorised as photo manipulations.

ive also made some observations as to what i see as what is popular here on D.A. and i know ive opened myself up here to lots of stick.....especially among the cat owners (and im guilty in another way posting dog pictures ;)...but hey lets have some fun  with it, if you have any suggestions to the list then lets here them it seems its the way the thread is going.....  
so debate..:D
Add a Comment:
 
:iconjakespain:
JakeSpain Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Thanks Alex.
Reply
:iconandymumford:
AndyMumford Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008
It's a great read....I love his photography, and Mountain Light and Anthology are superb books with great photograph and writing.
But this book is something deeper, it deals with the the "whys" of photography, more than the "hows".

The only book I've read which deals with the same subject is David Ward's "Lanscapes Within", although the Galen Rowell book is far deeper and more interesting.

By the way, I didn't think I had anything left to say to Steven's article after you're really well written comment...but it turns out I did...I think I've written even more than you, if you want to check it out and see if you agree with me :-)
Reply
:iconalex37:
Alex37 Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
David ward is releasing a new book in April.
Reply
:iconandymumford:
AndyMumford Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008
Yeah I know, it's already in my Amazon shopping basket, along with the new books by Joe Cornish and David Noton :-)
Reply
:iconjakespain:
JakeSpain Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Thanks Andy, I needed to say that stuff. Things are never simple.

The book you are refering to sounds fascinating and I will definately look into buying a copy. I have been "colourblind" all my life but have never had the usual symptoms and have never had my own "condition" explained to me. I just get confused between some colours and other but only at certain times or in certain situations. It's very strange and seemingly very unusual. It seems like the writings you refer to are suggesting that everyone eyesite for colour is slightly different so I better check it out as this is something I have always felt.
Reply
:iconthe-other1:
the-other1 Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008
to busy taking cat photos to comment :P
:evillaugh:
My cat will take over the world
:evillaugh::evillaugh::evillaugh:

ps, your journal made me laugh,,,,lots :D
Reply
:iconjzcj5:
jzcj5 Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
I dont know that I completely agree with this...

I think you are not leaving many people room to experiment with new facets of photography. I think that many would categorize me as one who takes some "RAW bracket stuff" and I would call it art. I know what you are getting at but that eliminates so much of what photography is. You want to talk pure photography... you dont shoot film, and many purists would argue that you dont qualify as a real photographer either. Just how far back do you want to go as far as judgment goes?

HDR is a method of photography that takes some different talents and perspectives and if you discredit that as actual photography, you are just stifling the progression of what photography can really do. It comes from the same image and it is not "doctoring" an image from multiple images or going beyond the limits of a singular image really... I am a fan of HDR (considering I do them) and I am proud of what I have done with it.

As far as popularity goes...do you think you are really going to change their minds by this statement and do you really think you are the first to say it. I have learned to be humble when it comes to dA crusades because who are you to really define art. I love a lot of your pieces but many purists would say they are shit because you have used photoshop or some other level of post production to enhance them. Are you going to roll over and say "yeah...you got me..."

Remember where you are and what the argument was toward your style of photos about 5-10 years ago (ish), when digital was really making a splash.

I know where you are coming from, but it is not leading to a good place. It can be applied to you too...
Reply
:iconvlacruz:
vlacruz Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
I think you're getting somewhere.
You see, I'm not a photographer, but I'm an avid watcher and as a final destination of the artwork of other people let me say just two things:
- The purism can exist only in the extremes.
Whatever you do to a photograph, excluding pressing the button, is a manipulation.
If you adjust the brightness or use a filter to catch the gamma rays, you're not showing reality, you're just adultering the pure reality.
I don't think that even the greatest photographers can be measured to that.
- The apreciation of art, for a non profesional, is based in what you see and not in how the artist do it (we may be curious about that, but at the end we just care about the picture).

Art is perception. Any kind of perception.
Reply
:iconjzcj5:
jzcj5 Featured By Owner Jul 20, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
For sure, though art and religion are not strangers in that both have cult followings that cling to some doctrine claiming what "righteousness" is, and in this case, technique and skill.
Reply
:iconalex37:
Alex37 Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
It's not a matter of stifling photography's progression, its more that bad processing and bad HDR is being passed off as "real" and consequently the value of photography which is intent on revealing the truth is reduced. "A picture never lies" is a good example of how people generally regard photography as truthful, and this is a great power of our medium which we should be careful not to lose.

Image editing is not the issue here, its the excessive use of editing which pushes the image beyond the realms of what could seriously be considered a photograph.

There is clearly a place for extreme processing or for that matter doing whatever you want to a photo, but there is a point where it can not really profess to be photogrpahy and more.

This news article is supposed to be tongue in cheek but it does raise relevant points, shying away from the issue would be a mistake since it is such an integral part of digital photography today.

Alex
Reply
:iconjzcj5:
jzcj5 Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
I dont think I agree with this but I am not going to convince you of my perspective nor are you going to sway me, so I will leave this with an agree to disagree.

I had a lot to write in response to this, but understand that there are a LOT of opinions on this subject and I dont think that you realize that this takes a very narrow perspective into account. The key really is that if you dont like the art, dont look at it. If it is popular and you dont like that, well, so far it would seem that comes from the nature of the watchers on dA. If it bothers you that much Im sure there are other sites. Art is about expression, not popularity anyway in my eyes. It can be frustrating sometimes but it always is when I lose sight of the ultimate goal...expression.

Thanks for the time taken to respond.
Reply
:iconalex37:
Alex37 Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
If you cant be bothered to understand what I wrote then I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Reply
:iconjzcj5:
jzcj5 Featured By Owner Mar 25, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Thats not what I said... I think that you are only crediting those who have gotten "good" at HDR and "good" at photoshop so as to do them correctly. People have to start somewhere and you are not leaving room for them to start out and practice. Initially, this was about the "popular" pictures and now it has digressed to your definition of what a photograph is and proper editing techniques, but ultimately it is simply your opinion.

I can see some of the merit in this argument, but I think that to make such a big deal about overdoing things like post processing and HDR, you are only going to hurt those starting out and experimenting. I think you have a specific idea of what photography is to you and that is what you are trying to push, hiding behind this idea that "all that other stuff has a place, just not next to me in a gallery".

I agree to disagree because I dont think you are paying attention to what I am saying, nor are you open to it. I think that the previous statement was rude and unwarranted. If you are frustrated because I dont agree with you, dont comment on perspectives different than your own, because it is going to happen more often than not.
Reply
:iconmewantsbekungfoo:
mewantsbekungfoo Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2008
I thank you for what you have said and for standing up for the beginner hdr-ist. I am looking forward to trying it and am well aware that for some time my work in hdr may very well be placed in the "bad category" as of right now, nothing in my gallery is hdr but if you ever have time, it would mean a lot to me for you to swing by and tell my your honest opinion of my work... :D
Reply
:iconjzcj5:
jzcj5 Featured By Owner Jun 24, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Anytime my friend! I am kinda busy these days (hence the fact that Im so damn late on responding!) but I will do my best. I am not too great at them myself, but I have learned a few tricks that I will be happy to pass on :)
Reply
:iconmewantsbekungfoo:
mewantsbekungfoo Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2008
thank you so much! :D
Reply
:iconalex37:
Alex37 Featured By Owner Mar 25, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
People do have to start somewhere, but HDR is more like trying to run before you can walk. Sure there will be some stumbling black along the way as you learn, I can deal with halos, and flat shots, although I will often comment when I think the processing detracts from the original peice of work. I have no issue with people experimenting, I do it myself of course. What bothers me is people who know what they are doing creating an artwork from a photo and then claiming that it is somehow "real".

"all that other stuff has a place, just not next to me in a gallery" Well I agree with that to an extent, but its more that it will only have a place in my gallery if it does not claim to be real. Its this issue of pretending to be something it is not that botehrs me.

I dont expect you to agree with me, and I understand where you are coming from, but at the same time it seems to me that some issues need a bit more thought. Do photo graphic composites count as photography? If not, what differentaites them from photos that have been processed way past a realistic level?

Alex
Reply
:iconmewantsbekungfoo:
mewantsbekungfoo Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2008
very interesting debate... i understand what you are saying however i also, can see jzcj5's perspective... as a beginning hdr-ist, i found this article while searching the internet for definitions of what makes "good" and "bad" hdr... so far nothing in my gallery is hdr, however i am a fan of adjusting levels to create the most vivid colours that push the "realistic" level... so i ask this in the most humble honesty that you might swing by my page and offer your true unabridged opinion of my work... choose any image(s) to critique as i am looking to better my photography through many different experienced opinions of what is "good"... i thank you in advance for your time...
Reply
:iconmattlew:
MattLew Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2008   Photographer
I don't know about saturation...and over-editing is probably debatable. I totally agree with bad HDR though. Way too many of them around.

But yeah I'm kind of losing dA. Don't spend as much time here or upload as much anymore.
Reply
:iconcuriouscorn:
CuriousCorn Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2008
Your journal gave me a good laugh and I certainly sympathise with what you say here. However, I want to add a word of caution, as there is a danger that post-processing in general will be shunned if this line is taken too far. I voiced this concern in my own journal recently ([link]).

This is really just a philosophical point about the need to be liberal. I do regard bad use of hdr and the sort of cheating that was discussed in your journal to be quite an unfortunate feature of dA.
Reply
:iconlakemans:
lakemans Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2008
"there may be trouble ahead".........

good luck with that, Im off to shoot some RAW bracket stuff to layer later in PS and blend using some naff sotware and call it art.
Reply
:icontonsatz:
Tonsatz Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2008
im glad to see that you made this into an article. im still on your side :P
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:iconsassaputzin: More from sassaputzin


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
March 20, 2008
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
579
Favourites
33 (who?)
Comments
52
×