| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/01/2003 11:07:39 PM · #1 |
Quark would have fewer "problems" if Adobe didn't control both Pagemaker/InDesign/FrameMaker and the PostScript language, not to mention Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, and most font technologies.
Although, with the adoption of System OS X.x.x I'm going to have to reserve a share of my ire for Apple as well .... |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 10:52:46 PM · #2 |
if i were you, kostia, i'd blame quark. other than diet coke and photoshop, a good chunk of my day is also spent fighting with quark and acrobat distiller. %*#&%*&%(*#%&#*$^#$&^@!!!!!
if you can't blame it on microsoft, you can blame it on quark. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 08:32:02 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
diet coke + Photoshop 7 = most of my daily work life. *shrug* |
That's my work day too, plus Quark and Illustrator.
Except that on Friday we stopped work early and had pizza and beer, then we went out, and I didn't get home in time to post my Halloween photo.
I blame Photoshop.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 07:02:52 PM · #4 |
if its artistic and fitting it suits me just fine no matter what
catagory of art it is... or isn't for some folks
soup |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 06:44:14 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
We'll save that discussion for the next time i get out to the west coast(which better be soon, because it's ridiculously cold here)
:) |
Deal. :-) |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 06:00:25 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Now, if you had a decent wine as old as the time it takes to go anywhere with this subject, I'd give it a go. ;-) |
I've got a 1997 bottle of Chateauneuf du Pape waiting for a special occasion...the last of the case :(
My meat reference was that ridiculous display a decade or so back (Montreal had one, and I think NYC as well) of a meat rendering of the human form. of course the display didn't last that long as it began to decay. yuck.
To me, you can't call it art unless it has Elvis, Poker Playing Dogs, or at least a little Velvet (preferably all three).
We'll save that discussion for the next time i get out to the west coast(which better be soon, because it's ridiculously cold here)
:)
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 05:24:43 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
As my Graphic Design professor used to say, "You can't polish a turd." |
Sure you can ...  |
I stand corrected.
Maybe after some millions of years, someone will polish one of my photographic turds, but `til then, they're still just crap.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 04:11:41 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Hey, it seems to be a reprieve for some to do what they like, and as such, why not? I pretty much feel the way muckpond does and, anticipating the results, didn't enter. When I went to vote, I found one photo I considered for a 5, all others below 5. Obviously, I decided not to vote at all.
What is commonly considered digital art, has nothing to do with art and very little with photography, apparently (as seen from this here perch). But then again, I don't drink Pepsi either, probably for similar reasons. ;-) |
thanks for what would have been a 5 ;)
I'll preface this by saying I'm NOT a photoshop freak.
But Zues really, how can you say it has nothing to do with art? Maybe it's not your taste of art, but it's art nonetheless (for the record, I'm not necessarily referring to anything in this challenge). Hell if rotting meat is art, digital manipulation of photos is art. And it has everything to do with photography, since it's created from a photograph.
5 years ago (and there are still the relics today)most would have said photography without film isn't even photography.
I say all that partially as the Devil's Advocate since I really don't like massively manipulated images either. I'm just saying that Coke IS much better than Pepsi, and digital art is still art.
:) |
You're welcome, Pedro. ;-)
I really don't want to go anywhere near the what is art threads, we've had here in the past. And yes, there probably is a percent or so in that trough we call digital art , I would consider art. Much is garish, gift-shop drudgery (to me). Some (to me) is good craft, with a graphical merit.
Rotten meat, certainly, is not art, although there may be a context somewhere, you and I have not addressed, that would make it so.
Now, if you had a decent wine as old as the time it takes to go anywhere with this subject, I'd give it a go. ;-)
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 16:13:37. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 03:55:08 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
diet coke + Photoshop 7 = most of my daily work life. *shrug* |
sounds like the perfect life to me, bro. Man, they PAY you for that? i do that for free. :) |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 03:46:46 PM · #10 |
| diet coke + Photoshop 7 = most of my daily work life. *shrug* |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 03:41:28 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Hey, it seems to be a reprieve for some to do what they like, and as such, why not? I pretty much feel the way muckpond does and, anticipating the results, didn't enter. When I went to vote, I found one photo I considered for a 5, all others below 5. Obviously, I decided not to vote at all.
What is commonly considered digital art, has nothing to do with art and very little with photography, apparently (as seen from this here perch). But then again, I don't drink Pepsi either, probably for similar reasons. ;-) |
thanks for what would have been a 5 ;)
I'll preface this by saying I'm NOT a photoshop freak.
But Zues really, how can you say it has nothing to do with art? Maybe it's not your taste of art, but it's art nonetheless (for the record, I'm not necessarily referring to anything in this challenge). Hell if rotting meat is art, digital manipulation of photos is art. And it has everything to do with photography, since it's created from a photograph.
5 years ago (and there are still the relics today)most would have said photography without film isn't even photography.
I say all that partially as the Devil's Advocate since I really don't like massively manipulated images either. I'm just saying that Coke IS much better than Pepsi, and digital art is still art.
:) |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 03:19:58 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
...You CAN use Photoshop to do digital art. I should have said "if you're using Photoshop correctly as a photo-editing tool..." But if you use "liquify" in an everyday photo, it's going to be obviously manipulated and people are going to question everything else about the photograph. The power of Photoshop is in the ability to subtle-y manipulate certain portions of a photo that improve the photo as a whole, but don't LOOK obviously manipulated... |
Hey, it seems to be a reprieve for some to do what they like, and as such, why not? I pretty much feel the way muckpond does and, anticipating the results, didn't enter. When I went to vote, I found one photo I considered for a 5, all others below 5. Obviously, I decided not to vote at all.
What is commonly considered digital art, has nothing to do with art and very little with photography, apparently (as seen from this here perch). But then again, I don't drink Pepsi either, probably for similar reasons. ;-) |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 02:30:29 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
As my Graphic Design professor used to say, "You can't polish a turd." |
Sure you can ... |
LOL, GeneralE, I have a coprolite sitting under my desk awaiting polishing...
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 14:34:44.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 02:28:15 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Crafty Sue:
One other thing it seems we are a group of complaining people,
Sue |
Yeah, got a complaint about that? |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 02:24:44 PM · #15 |
I have been here since Feb. 2003 and there has always been someone that did not like each and every challenge or a picture someone else took
Some try to decide how long a person spent on a photo only mind readers can do that. Some don't like comments that are made or what people say about the comments . This all tells me that we are a big variety of people so In my opinion we should have a variety of types of challenges
What one doesn't like another will and we can submit to the ones we like. One other thing it seems we are a group of complaining people,
Sue
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 02:20:53 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
i just hate it that people take "no editing restrictions" as a means to go completely overboard. |
A lot of sites consider it photography, as long as it started out as a photo. Check out this site I found yesterday
Look under the very first one. "Master Photographer-Black and White Photography" check out the pics
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 14:21:35.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 02:09:09 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
As my Graphic Design professor used to say, "You can't polish a turd." |
Sure you can ...
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 14:10:31. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 02:05:20 PM · #18 |
Photoshop is just another tool in the digital photographer's toolbox.
It is an interesting departure from the norm to occasionally have a challenge where it's use is not as restricted as in the typical challenge. I don't think every challenge should be that way.
A bad photo will still be a bad photo with or without Photoshop. As my Graphic Design professor used to say, "You can't polish a turd."
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 01:42:34 PM · #19 |
There are plenty of excellent tutorial sites and several truly outstanding books for learning Photoshop. Why fault a site like this one, which has a specific aim, for not "teaching" Photoshop, when there are so many fine resources dedicated to that purpose? Broaden your horizons a little bit. Learn from fellow photographers here; learn from Photoshop experts somewhere else.
Some of the entries in the Halloween challenge--and in the Future challenge, and in any challenge where editing restrictions are removed--are digital art in only the broadest sense of the word "art." Things like composition, color, and subject still matter. When someone posts an image that's just a bunch of "look what I can do with THIS filter," with no sense of balance, scale, and emotion, it's no longer art, any more than any unedited, badly done photograph is.
Removing editing restrictions seems to invite Photoshoppery for the sake of Photoshoppery. Which doesn't help anyone learn anything.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 01:39:55 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
edit: and yes you did sound a little shrill when you threw the "duh" in there. Not necessary :) |
duh!
(there, I'm done) :) |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 01:11:25 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by mariomel:
That being said, I just think some people crossed the line between editing a PHOTO a creating a piece of DIGITAL ART. I think this is the reason many people voted not to expand the editing rules.... |
I think the appropriate action is to give those photos lower votes. Don't punish people for using the tools, only for using them "inappropriately."
Photoshop doesn't kill photographs, photographers do.
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 14:03:49. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 12:36:39 PM · #22 |
Please don't get me wrong. I am not Bit{>ing or complaining, just stating my opinion. I use PS ALL the time on my photos. I use it to the maximum allowable in the challenges. When the rules are relaxed, I use the extra possibilities as well. (I used some of them on my entry). I retouch photos after the challenges to "better" my prints. I THINK PS IS AWESOME!
That being said, I just think some people crossed the line between editing a PHOTO a creating a piece of DIGITAL ART. I think this is the reason many people voted not to expand the editing rules.
As far as I think, we are photographers not graphic artists. Yes this was a challenge in which we should have fun, but we should never forget who we are.
Discuss...
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 12:30:24 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by grigrigirl:
I wish we could learn more about photoshop through this site...and through non restrictive challenges. I have interesting ideas but have not the know how to accomplish a final result! Ive seen some amazing artwork produced through photography and photoshop combined. Photoshop is a wonderful tool. |
I agree with ya! just learning the filters, and what everything else does would be fun too!
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 12:34:58.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 11:43:30 AM · #24 |
i agree completely on everyday pictures, Muck. I only meant to imply that for challenges like this, it's cool. I lightly touch up all my prints, because it can correct for some of my inadequacies as a photographer.
I voted NOT to relax the everyday editing rules, FYI. for all the same reasons you're mentioning about the digital art thing.
Pedro
edit: and yes you did sound a little shrill when you threw the "duh" in there. Not necessary :)
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 11:44:30. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 11:34:05 AM · #25 |
I know what you mean muck. These challenges are the ones that people always dig up as a reason not to relax the editing rules in open challenges. In that sense I don't think that they're a good idea, but for halloween I think it's good fun to see what people came up with. In a 'normal' challenge (such as still life for example) I wouldn't like to see digital art.
|
|
