|
What a great discussion.
Gregory
Roger I see it like this. It's not about swooning. It's about art. It's about whether your have a curiosity or whether you change your opinion based oh how the work is created. I think it's quit normal for a person with your background to have the questions you have. Its even sort of interesting in that it clearly shows how a persons environment shapes whats important to them. Which can be very important in the presentation of art. I don't think it's a valid question if asked in the evaluation of the work beyond if it works or doesn't work as an element of the art. These aren't journalistic.
You are I believe overlooking an even simpler solution though. The 2 attached image. haze or not to haze 2 photos One is as just as shot. The other is with contrast and clarity adjustments. It quit possible that a light fog existed when shot and was corrected out of the images leaving the tight looking shape of the light. Those are not as long of exposure as his nor do I know how bright his headlamps can be, or if they are adjustable. I am also at Sea level in Winter so I don't have the same levels of UV to ad even more addition haze for the light. Now ad that he can't possible hodl very still or may even be moving his head a little and then using some frame averaging to sharpen up multiple exposures and the possibilities become endless. (fyi Frame averaging can also be done in a dark room and even on a scanner if you are shooting with sheets of cow.)
I think if you only saw the end result of this video you could go into a conversation just like this. How could he have made those branches separate tonally like that? The light from all the branches wouldn't allow for this to happen naturally. On and on. right? But in the end there are many ways for anything visually to happen especially when its in our make up to ask.
So I do think you can do both and your question is valid when in a context other then whether this is good art or not good art. In that regard I believe Jan's response is that he is present art and the comment is on how he did it. Again I can only I Get Jan's point but I do also feel there can be a discussion of the technical but I think they are different topics of discussion. In your original post I feel you have linked them. and to be SUPER CLEAR when I refer to I think and I feel. It means its just my opinion of some text on the interwebs because thats my subjective opinion.
One last note would be that I have a BFA from RIT in Applied photography. We didn't have many thermal dynamics classes for me to remember much from. When I need to know Geo Physics I call Dr. Mark. Now I might also call you. Do you ever use Real Flow? :-D
But to continue in this line of conversation. On Jan 15, 2014 12:16 AM, "Eichhorn, Roger" <eichhorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
|
