Chris, Certainly most early photographs did not require several studio or darkroom sessions. The majority of photographs were simple, and inexpensive portraits. I agree that composite and collaged images were used from the beginning and the aim was definitely to imitate the conventions of Victorian painting. Landscape photography involved double printing of the sky because the plates were not panchromatic. Nevertheless photos were still very much photos. Anything beyond that is, strictly speaking, "mixed media." I think we have an intellectual responsibility to maintain clear usage of the language of our art. More frequently I see traditional photographers labeling their work "unmanipulated photograph" or something similar. Why should they need to "opt-out" as it were, of the mixed media genre? It is the deviant pictures that should be labeled as such. AZ Build a Lookaround! The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed. NOW SHIPPING http://www.panoramacamera.us > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: My Computer Graphic > From: "Chris" <nimbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, February 17, 2005 10:10 am > To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" > <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Manipulation of the image has been used since the beginning of photography. > Most of the early work had several studio sessions with different models and > these were placed into arty scenery in the darkroom. > > And lots of the alternative processing was done with the object of making a > painterly image. > > So there is nothing new. > > Chris. > > :> -----Original Message----- > :> From: owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner- > :> photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Shyrell Melara > :> Sent: 17 February 2005 13:57 > :> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students > :> Subject: Re: My Computer Graphic > :> > :> In a demacratic society, of course, majority rules. But I still object to > :> composing a completely computer generated image in PS (or any other > :> program) and calling it photography. > :> Webster's: pho-tog-ra-phy\ n1839: the art or process of producing images > :> on a sensitized surface (as a film) by the action of radient energy and > :> especially light. > :> Of course I need a new dictionary, one that now has the definition of > :> digital photography. But I still need to hold on to, for now, that > :> photography is, by its nature, something more than the product of a > :> program without a "photograph", be it film or digital. > :> > :> SM
