Bob and Mark, I think digital photography is virtual photography. I would say that rather than being artists skilled digital photographers are illustrators. I think results are what count and jibes about methods to achieve them are only for fun. It is, of course, senseless to essentialize anything or any one except in jest. AZ Build a Lookaround! The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed. NOW SHIPPING http://www.panoramacamera.us > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: Digital Photography > From: "Bob" <w8imo@xxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri, August 06, 2004 10:11 am > To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" > <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Wenner, Mark wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > In my opinion digital cameras and digital image processing is not > > about fool-proof photography that avoids "mis-aligned or blurred > > facsimiles of what you wanted" . Digital photography is just another > > creative means to allow the photographer to express his or her vision, > > emotions, or ideas. It is a complex tool box that allows the > > photographer to run the full gamut from correcting for red-eye, > > removing lint from a dark wool coat, removing electrical lines in > > architectural shots, sharpening a blurred image, changing contrast > > and hue, to complete manipulation and transformation of an captured > > image into something totally different by using filters and overlays. > > A digital camera and Photoshop allows you to do pretty much everything > > except the alternative wet plate and gum processes developed in the > > 1800s. > > > > > You might be able to imagine the reaction I got at a recent photo club > meeting when I said that I felt that people that use a digital camera > and Photoshop are not photographers. I said that in my opinion they are > artists. By the way, there is nothing wrong with being an artist. > > I feel this way because a photographer is pretty much stuck with the > image captured buy the camera. While burning and dodging allow some > manipulation to come up with the desired print, it is a whole lot easier > to remove or add something to a digital image and get the desired > output. If a tree on the left side would improve the print, add one. > > We had a photo editor from the local newspaper speak at a meeting. One > of he PJs took a digital shot of a Champ Car driver and got himself > reflected in the visor on the driver's helmet. He said no problem, > Photoshop will take that right out. A few mouse clicks and it was > gone. Would have been a bit tougher with the old way. Oh, by the way, > the PJ had to go back and reshoot the driver and make sure there were no > reflections. > > Understand that I am not belittling or knocking digital photography, I > feel that there is a definite place for it. It's just not the same as > the old way. > > One last thing, I'm sort of waiting for the Canon 10D update/replacement > to get here. So some day I'll probably be an "artist" too. > > Bob
