| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/29/2015 02:35:53 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by LevT:
photography, quite literally, is recording light. Extensive digital manipulations done in a computer take the result far outside the realm of photography, IMO. Call me a retrograde :) |
Actually, "Photography" means "Drawing with light" or "writing with light", both of which (conceptually) offer far more latitude than "recording".
But never mind that. We're all entitled to our own personal takes on the subject. Where *I* get my knickers in a bit of a twist is when people who have a personal stance on an issue try/want to exclude others with a different stance from participating in the contest after the fact. I can understand creating a contest to generate specific sorts of photography (we do it here all the time), but evidently the contest referenced here allowed photoshop manipulations, so I figure we might as well enjoy them for what they are :-) |
Robt, let's not quibble over semantics, recording light or writing with light, either way the image is created by light entering the camera, not by a computer program.
I don't care too much about landscape photography, so it's ok with me when people photoshop the hell out of a scene to make it pretty... but if a well-done composite won a street photography competition... I would be pissed :) |
|
|
|
08/29/2015 09:08:33 AM · #2 |
I guess actually reading the rules first might help (heck, we should try that here).
...snip
6. The judges are looking for photographs that epitomise the art and craft of landscape photography. This will mean different things to different judges. Your job is to impress the judges.
7. The Entries presented for judging must be photographic in origin (taken with a camera), but there are no restrictions on post-production except that any post-production must be the work of the entrant. You cannot have someone else edit or work on the image for you. We consider this part of the art of landscape photography.
Doesn't mention (thus dismiss) the use of composites so whilst (for me) they are lovely images they don't all scream 'I must go to that location and take a shot' as it just wont happen.
Message edited by author 2015-08-29 09:27:43. |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 10:31:47 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by LevT:
photography, quite literally, is recording light. Extensive digital manipulations done in a computer take the result far outside the realm of photography, IMO. Call me a retrograde :) |
Actually, "Photography" means "Drawing with light" or "writing with light", both of which (conceptually) offer far more latitude than "recording".
But never mind that. We're all entitled to our own personal takes on the subject. Where *I* get my knickers in a bit of a twist is when people who have a personal stance on an issue try/want to exclude others with a different stance from participating in the contest after the fact. I can understand creating a contest to generate specific sorts of photography (we do it here all the time), but evidently the contest referenced here allowed photoshop manipulations, so I figure we might as well enjoy them for what they are :-) |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 10:25:40 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by kirbic:
I guess when someone purports to be a landscape photographer, as opposed to a landscape artist, I expect that at least there won't be gross manipulation of a scene. If the final work presents something that by no stretch of the imagination ever existed, it certainly may be art, and might be quite beautiful and moving, but is it landscape photography? |
Why NOT? Who says photography has to be "real"? |
photography, quite literally, is recording light. Extensive digital manipulations done in a computer take the result far outside the realm of photography, IMO. Call me a retrograde :) |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 09:12:29 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I guess when someone purports to be a landscape photographer, as opposed to a landscape artist, I expect that at least there won't be gross manipulation of a scene. If the final work presents something that by no stretch of the imagination ever existed, it certainly may be art, and might be quite beautiful and moving, but is it landscape photography? |
Why NOT? Who says photography has to be "real"? |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 09:09:53 PM · #6 |
I guess when someone purports to be a landscape photographer, as opposed to a landscape artist, I expect that at least there won't be gross manipulation of a scene. If the final work presents something that by no stretch of the imagination ever existed, it certainly may be art, and might be quite beautiful and moving, but is it landscape photography?
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 09:01:21 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Alexkc:
Originally posted by ursula:
I think they're beautiful, regardless of how they were made or of anyone's rules for how things have to be made to qualify. |
I agree with you, but landscape is a different matter IMO. This is not a fine art or an artwork contest. |
that's hilarious. much of what we now consider "fine art" was pioneered by Romantics painting landscapes.
You don't really know something if you don't know its history. |
Agreed. The landscapes of Hudson Valley School, especially Bierstadt's work in the American West, and of Turner come immediately to mind when I consider landscape-as-emotion, which is how I prefer to deal with it.
Message edited by author 2015-08-28 21:08:09. |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 08:16:48 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
Originally posted by ursula:
I think they're beautiful, regardless of how they were made or of anyone's rules for how things have to be made to qualify. |
I agree with you, but landscape is a different matter IMO. This is not a fine art or an artwork contest. |
that's hilarious. much of what we now consider "fine art" was pioneered by Romantics painting landscapes.
You don't really know something if you don't know its history. |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 07:10:41 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by ursula:
I think they're beautiful, regardless of how they were made or of anyone's rules for how things have to be made to qualify. |
I agree with you, but landscape is a different matter IMO. This is not a fine art or an artwork contest. |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 07:04:30 PM · #10 |
I think they're beautiful, regardless of how they were made or of anyone's rules for how things have to be made to qualify.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 05:48:38 PM · #11 |
Am guessing anybody can enter something and it's the people that choose the winner that decided to award overly post processed images? Maybe the judges are not so hot on post processing as we are here and they accepted them as natural images?
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 05:31:42 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
Are you talking of composite images? :) |
Yes, even them...it's an odd mix of images, some heavily Photoshopped, and others not as much, or at least they look more like an actual place.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 04:41:37 PM · #13 |
| Sure about two: long exposure with still birds and landscape with fake rain (he previously published that photo without rain). |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 03:42:34 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
IMO the real problem is with Luke Austin's photos. He won the award as best author. 2 out of 4 images are 'no doubt' composite images (maybe all of them). |
My feelings exactly. I'd love to be wrong, but...
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 02:33:40 PM · #15 |
Aahh -- that's pretty cool!
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I *think* those are an aerial view of dune buggy or ORV tracks in the outback... |
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 02:30:28 PM · #16 |
| IMO the real problem is with Luke Austin's photos. He won the award as best author. 2 out of 4 images are 'no doubt' composite images (maybe all of them). |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 02:15:17 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by tate:
I'm not even sure what I'm looking at in the last one. |
Will Dielenberg is an Australian landscape photographer, a very well-known one. I *think* those are an aerial view of dune buggy or ORV tracks in the outback... |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 12:17:07 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by tate:
Many of these would be wonderful prints and sell well (as a book) so I think this is a case of money talking ... They certainly do not all conform to the the assumed rule-set of what would be "landscape photographers" -- ;) Much of this is "expert editing" with out question =O
I'm not even sure what I'm looking at in the last one.
ETA: I believe they are beautiful as well. It just seems to stray from the National Geographic type of landscape many of us appreciate. The Nat Geo images bring us closer to a location ... these bring us closer to an artist.
Originally posted by Alexkc:
I'm specifically talking of the winning author. |
|
Ok, that's exactly what I thought man! |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 12:09:46 PM · #19 |
Many of these would be wonderful prints and sell well (as a book) so I think this is a case of money talking ... They certainly do not all conform to the the assumed rule-set of what would be "landscape photographers" -- ;) Much of this is "expert editing" with out question =O
I'm not even sure what I'm looking at in the last one.
ETA: I believe they are beautiful as well. It just seems to stray from the National Geographic type of landscape many of us appreciate. The Nat Geo images bring us closer to a location ... these bring us closer to an artist.
Originally posted by Alexkc:
I'm specifically talking of the winning author. |
Message edited by author 2015-08-28 12:11:49. |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 12:05:01 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
I'm specifically talking of the winning author. |
I agree that the winning photo seems more montage-y than landscape-y. But the images, in the aggregate, are quite stunning even if dramatically enhanced in post. |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 12:01:42 PM · #21 |
| I'm specifically talking of the winning author. |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 11:56:56 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
Guys I can't share your enthusiasm. This was a landscape contest and the author has heavily manipulated stuff. Rain, for instance, is sooo fake! |
I do agree that there appears to be *very* heavy manipulation in a lot of the images. On the other hand, some of them don't appear to be over-cooked, and a lot of them, compositionally are outstanding.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 11:51:33 AM · #23 |
| Guys I can't share your enthusiasm. This was a landscape contest and the author has heavily manipulated stuff. Rain, for instance, is sooo fake! |
|
|
|
08/28/2015 11:37:41 AM · #24 |
Wow. Beautiful stuff! Obviously, I need to shoot more in inclement weather!
|
|
|
|
08/28/2015 11:08:28 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Those are beautiful! |
No kidding! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 09:06:26 PM EDT.
