DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

Threads will be shown in descending order for the remainder of this session. To permanently display posts in this order, adjust your preferences.
DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> Let's Talk About Textures
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 303, descending (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/18/2008 10:39:27 PM · #1
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

... or do you mean as he saw the scene in his imagination, as only he could see it? He's not here, to say for sure.

Ansel Adams has expressed this latter view, often, in print (pun intended).


I see your pun. Thanks for the humor! "D
08/18/2008 10:32:41 PM · #2
Originally posted by pixelpig:

... or do you mean as he saw the scene in his imagination, as only he could see it? He's not here, to say for sure.

Ansel Adams has expressed this latter view, often, in print (pun intended).
============
Chapter 1 -- Visualization and the Expressive Image

The philosophy set forth in these books is directed to the final expression of the photographer's visualization -- the print. The two previous volumes of this series have been devoted to achieving a completed negative, but despite this emphasis, a negative is only an intermediate step towards the finished print, and means little as an object in itself. Much effort and control go into the making of the negative, not for the negative's own sake, but in order to have the best possible "raw material" for the final printing.

... In printing we accept the negative as a staring point that determines much, but not all, of the character of the final image. Just as different photographers can interpret one subject in numerous ways, so might they each make varying prints from identical negatives.

--Ansel Adams, The Print (1982)
====================
There are many other relavant quotes from that book too, but I'm not that fast a typist nor looking for an infringement suit ... ;-)

The digital equivalents for the above would be "straight from the camera" for the negative, and the freely/variably edited file is the print. He himself seems to confine his editing to tone shifts (dodging/burning), but the final result was often far from a "literal depiction" of the scene as-shot.

Message edited by author 2008-08-18 22:46:54.
08/18/2008 10:28:41 PM · #3
Originally posted by SnapperL:

Mick, my goal is not to get in a shouting match as i'm sure its not your intention. There are a lot of differing opinions on the site. As there should be different opinions! To me its very simple.

There hasn't been any shouting between us that I'm aware of. I certainly never intended to shout at you, and I have no problem with you expressing your opinion. I do ask however that you not attribute statements to me that I did not make. :)

Originally posted by SnapperL:

Perhaps there are people that don't even like the Advanced Rule set in its current form so they only participate in Basic challenges. And there are probably people that don't like to be "restricted" by the basic rule set so they don't participate in those challenges. But lets face it the Advance Rule set DOES allow you to do more to a photo than you could in a dark room.

On the contrary, almost anything can be done to an image in a darkroom. However, just as with digital editing, there's a point at which the edited image becomes something other than a photograph. At least that's what I and many others believe.

Originally posted by SnapperL:

So where is the gray line that differentiates between Digital art and a normal photo.

There are probably as many 'gray lines' as there are people with opinions on the subject. :D

Originally posted by SnapperL:

The answer is it does not matter.

It does matter. At least to some of us. Otherwise, why have any rules?

Originally posted by SnapperL:

Add another Rule set that allows MORE to be done to a photo and let the people that want to enter in to those challenges enter them. The ones that don't want to don't have to.

As I said before, I have no problem with that. Others probably will though. Personally, I wish we had a simpler set of rules, whether it includes overlays or not.

Originally posted by SnapperL:

Ok, I gave my opinion. I'm done.

Thanks,
Ben

Yeah, me too. Nice chatting with you Ben.
08/18/2008 10:18:48 PM · #4
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

I wonder if photographers are worried that an honest photograph of reality can't compete successfully against an artist's vision.


There is no such thing. Every photograph lies.


True. Every photograph lies. But once the lie is captured an artist feels free to add to or subtract from the original, while the photographer seems to feel that this is cheating, making up for failures in the original, or compensating for failure as a photographer.


Interesting so following this line of reasoning Ansel was a failure as a photographer? He did his version of PP in the dark room adding and subtracting to make the print as he saw the scene.


I think we should leave Ansel out of this, he's dead & can't join in.


Um OK so I guess with that our little discussion is over ...

:-/


I have the greatest respect for Ansel Adams, as we all do. You use the phrase "make the print as he saw the scene." Do you mean as he saw reality in front of him (which someone else with 2 eyes could also see)or do you mean as he saw the scene in his imagination, as only he could see it? He's not here, to say for sure. To me, there's a big difference. At any rate, textures/overlays can only be banned on this site by SC, not at my house. If SC decides to limit DPChallenge to whatever Ansel Adams could/would/did after he got the original capture, then that's what they will do. I can go along to get along or get out.
08/18/2008 08:32:16 PM · #5
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

I would add that ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music worked with Ansel maybe his input might be of more value to you. Bear has said, on previous occasions, that Ansel would have loved Photoshop and would have used it like he did the dark room.

ETA: Ansel's darkroom editing is well documented so even in death he brings the knowledge of his technique.


From earlier in this thread (although, speaking for himself and not Ansel in this case):

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

I think there's another element here though; there are members who want this site to be "about" traditional, or conventional, photography. They are not "afraid" of these other things, they just don't want to deal with them or compete against them. I think you do these people a disservice by imputing "insecurity" tot hem; their point is a valid one, that up til now DPC has been perhaps the only, and certainly the best, "pure" photography contest site, and they want to keep it that way.

Others of us want to see the site "broadened", to include categories for these other sorts of image making. I don't think I['ve seen anyone seriously propose that the rules be changed so anything goes, all the time, but a LOT of people want to be able to enter challenges with special skills ets involved.

Does it in anyway "harm" DPC to run these special challenges? personally, I don't think so and I welcome them. But I don't for a minute believe that those who oppose them, as a group, are somehow frightened or intimidated by them.

R.


I doubt that Ansel would have been interested in multi-image compositing and texture overlays. These things were available to him in the analogue darkroom and as far as I know he never used them. He definitely would have taken advantage of the possibility of HDR imaging, which after all is the digital equivalent of his Zone System. But one thing I'm sure of: he wouldn't have dismissed these other sorts of efforts, which he was not interested in, as invalid or not worthwhile. He liked Jerry Uelsmann's work, I know that for a fact.

R.

R.
08/18/2008 07:12:45 PM · #6
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

I would add that ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music worked with Ansel maybe his input might be of more value to you. Bear has said, on previous occasions, that Ansel would have loved Photoshop and would have used it like he did the dark room.

ETA: Ansel's darkroom editing is well documented so even in death he brings the knowledge of his technique.


From earlier in this thread (although, speaking for himself and not Ansel in this case):

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

I think there's another element here though; there are members who want this site to be "about" traditional, or conventional, photography. They are not "afraid" of these other things, they just don't want to deal with them or compete against them. I think you do these people a disservice by imputing "insecurity" tot hem; their point is a valid one, that up til now DPC has been perhaps the only, and certainly the best, "pure" photography contest site, and they want to keep it that way.

Others of us want to see the site "broadened", to include categories for these other sorts of image making. I don't think I['ve seen anyone seriously propose that the rules be changed so anything goes, all the time, but a LOT of people want to be able to enter challenges with special skills ets involved.

Does it in anyway "harm" DPC to run these special challenges? personally, I don't think so and I welcome them. But I don't for a minute believe that those who oppose them, as a group, are somehow frightened or intimidated by them.

R.
08/18/2008 05:44:49 PM · #7
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

I would add that ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music worked with Ansel maybe his input might be of more value to you. Bear has said, on previous occasions, that Ansel would have loved Photoshop and would have used it like he did the dark room.

ETA: Ansel's darkroom editing is well documented so even in death he brings knowledge of his technique.

FWIW, I met another of Ansel's assistants during a soiree at Adams' house/studio, and he said the same thing.
08/18/2008 05:37:43 PM · #8
I would add that ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music worked with Ansel maybe his input might be of more value to you. Bear has said, on previous occasions, that Ansel would have loved Photoshop and would have used it like he did the dark room.

ETA: Ansel's darkroom editing is well documented so even in death he brings the knowledge of his technique.

Message edited by author 2008-08-18 17:43:44.
08/18/2008 05:34:27 PM · #9
Originally posted by pixelpig:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

I wonder if photographers are worried that an honest photograph of reality can't compete successfully against an artist's vision.


There is no such thing. Every photograph lies.


True. Every photograph lies. But once the lie is captured an artist feels free to add to or subtract from the original, while the photographer seems to feel that this is cheating, making up for failures in the original, or compensating for failure as a photographer.


Interesting so following this line of reasoning Ansel was a failure as a photographer? He did his version of PP in the dark room adding and subtracting to make the print as he saw the scene.


I think we should leave Ansel out of this, he's dead & can't join in.


Um OK so I guess with that our little discussion is over ...

:-/
08/18/2008 05:32:55 PM · #10
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

I wonder if photographers are worried that an honest photograph of reality can't compete successfully against an artist's vision.


There is no such thing. Every photograph lies.


True. Every photograph lies. But once the lie is captured an artist feels free to add to or subtract from the original, while the photographer seems to feel that this is cheating, making up for failures in the original, or compensating for failure as a photographer.


Interesting so following this line of reasoning Ansel was a failure as a photographer? He did his version of PP in the dark room adding and subtracting to make the print as he saw the scene.


I think we should leave Ansel out of this, he's dead & can't join in.
08/18/2008 01:47:33 PM · #11
Mick, my goal is not to get in a shouting match as i'm sure its not your intention. There are a lot of differing opinions on the site. As there should be different opinions! To me its very simple.

Perhaps there are people that don't even like the Advanced Rule set in its current form so they only participate in Basic challenges. And there are probably people that don't like to be "restricted" by the basic rule set so they don't participate in those challenges. But lets face it the Advance Rule set DOES allow you to do more to a photo than you could in a dark room.

So where is the gray line that differentiates between Digital art and a normal photo. The answer is it does not matter. Add another Rule set that allows MORE to be done to a photo and let the people that want to enter in to those challenges enter them. The ones that don't want to don't have to.

Ok, I gave my opinion. I'm done.

Thanks,
Ben
08/18/2008 01:28:02 PM · #12
Originally posted by pixelpig:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

I wonder if photographers are worried that an honest photograph of reality can't compete successfully against an artist's vision.


There is no such thing. Every photograph lies.


True. Every photograph lies. But once the lie is captured an artist feels free to add to or subtract from the original, while the photographer seems to feel that this is cheating, making up for failures in the original, or compensating for failure as a photographer.


Interesting so following this line of reasoning Ansel was a failure as a photographer? He did his version of PP in the dark room adding and subtracting to make the print as he saw the scene.

Message edited by author 2008-08-18 13:33:13.
08/18/2008 01:16:09 PM · #13
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by pixelpig:

I wonder if photographers are worried that an honest photograph of reality can't compete successfully against an artist's vision.


There is no such thing. Every photograph lies.


True. Every photograph lies. But once the lie is captured an artist feels free to add to or subtract from the original, while the photographer seems to feel that this is cheating, making up for failures in the original, or compensating for failure as a photographer.
08/18/2008 12:58:28 PM · #14
Originally posted by SnapperL:

Originally posted by Mick:

Originally posted by SnapperL:

Well having just been disqualified for adding an overlay I do have an opinion. When I was creating my image I had a picture in my head and had my final image in my head. Unfortunatley, I didn't even consider looking at the rules.

So my point is that with certain images it could be real difficult to get the shot you have in your head without using overlays or textures. This to me is against the idea and creativity of this site. Although, I do realize if you let it go to far then you end up with "digital art" that might be better off at sites like deviant art or what have you.

Okay, but if you can't create the shot you have in your head without drawing it in Photoshop, then are you making a photo or a drawing? In my opinion, it would be a drawing.

With a little ingenuity, a good photographer can make very creative effects, without resorting to drawing them in Photoshop. For example, you could make a photo similar to the image below by painting the texture on a sheet of glass and then shooting the subject through the glass. It may not be as easy as a few mouse clicks in Photoshop, but at least what you end up with is a photo. As a bonus, you may learn some things about lighting, controlling reflections, etc..

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

But heck, if you want instant gratification without any effort, as so many do these days, then you may want to stick with Photoshop's gimmick filters. To each his own. :D


Without resorting to personal insults as so many are doing in this discussion. I'll try to make my point.

This shot: ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/902/120/707632.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/902/120/707632.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' is in my opinion (course i'm its father so i'm going to think its good) was a good shot before I added the 1's and 0's overlay on my face. The lighting, composition, and contrast were all there BEFORE that overlay. In the absense of buying an overhead-projector or writing them on my face which wouldn't have looked as "computerized" I used an overlay to get the look i wanted for my picture.

But it can be done photographically. Here's a few from one very talented photographer...

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/554/120/395067.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/554/120/395067.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/674/120/506069.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/674/120/506069.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/585/120/427190.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/585/120/427190.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

There's no guarantee that every photographer is going to have the means or ability to get every photo they desire. I would love to shoot photos of Jessica Alba. Unfortunately, she hasn't made herself available to me (though I haven't given up hope). So, if I shoot a scene and then digitally paste her into it, am I creating a photograph of Jessica Alba, or digital art?

Originally posted by SnapperL:

According to you EVERYONE that uses textures and overlays does not know how to use there camera. To the contrary. [user]27133[/user] and [user]67145[/user] and the hundreds of other people on here that use textures and overlays are good "artist" as you put it and DO know their camera.

I did not say that. You did. Just now. Why did you feel it necessary to stretch the truth?

Originally posted by SnapperL:

Photography by the very nature that it is digital now instead of film has CHANGED.

Yes, the recording mechanism changed from an analog one to a digital one. So what? Just because the recording mechanism has changed does not mean that cameras are designed to perform a different function. They are still designed to create, as closely as possible, a record of a scene as it actually existed.

Originally posted by SnapperL:

I'm not really into 'Digital Art' either...

Ah, but you are, as your image and the method used to create it clearly indicate. The photo itself did not convey the message that you wanted it to so you used the computer to digitally manipulate (draw) the image that you wanted. The computer combined the photo photo you created with an overlay image and produced a completely new image. Whether or not the result is art is up to the viewer to decide. What cannot be denied is that it is a digital representation of a scene that never existed. Therefor it is not a photograph.

Originally posted by SnapperL:

...but perhaps in a different rule set than the current Advance editing rule set overlays and textures would be fine? Can everyone agree that in a DIFFERENT rule set we could live with overlays and textures?

I wouldn't have any problem with that. Whether or not everyone else will agree is problematic. :D

08/18/2008 12:34:33 PM · #15
Originally posted by pixelpig:

I wonder if photographers are worried that an honest photograph of reality can't compete successfully against an artist's vision.


There is no such thing. Every photograph lies.

Message edited by author 2008-08-18 12:39:08.
08/18/2008 12:12:06 PM · #16
If an elaborate setup is created in front of the camera to force something into existence to avoid post processing the shot, the result is going to look faked in a way that maybe can't be explained but which is unavoidable & obvious. Like in the old days of film, when they built a scale model of a city so they could blow it up or burn it down or flood it & fool the audience into believing it was real. It's a form of trickery that never really fools anyone & mildly insults the intelligence at the same time.

The confident expression of artistic vision can't be faked.

According to what I read in these forums & in this thread, photographers do not approve of using the camera for the purpose of self-expression or to achieve an artistic vision. Photography is to be used to document reality, even if the reality is faked. Every bit of post-processing only compromises the honesty of the original capture. I wonder if photographers are worried that an honest photograph of reality can't compete successfully against an artist's vision. I think maybe they are right. I think maybe it's not fair to ask photography to compete with art.
08/18/2008 11:23:06 AM · #17
Originally posted by Jac:

What has astonished me the most, and very much to my surprise, in this thread, is the dividing tone it has taken. The we vs them attitude just makes me wanna hurl.


Have you noticed yet that one side just wants to participate while the other side wants to exclude?
08/18/2008 10:41:12 AM · #18
Originally posted by Mick:

Originally posted by SnapperL:

Well having just been disqualified for adding an overlay I do have an opinion. When I was creating my image I had a picture in my head and had my final image in my head. Unfortunatley, I didn't even consider looking at the rules.

So my point is that with certain images it could be real difficult to get the shot you have in your head without using overlays or textures. This to me is against the idea and creativity of this site. Although, I do realize if you let it go to far then you end up with "digital art" that might be better off at sites like deviant art or what have you.

Okay, but if you can't create the shot you have in your head without drawing it in Photoshop, then are you making a photo or a drawing? In my opinion, it would be a drawing.

With a little ingenuity, a good photographer can make very creative effects, without resorting to drawing them in Photoshop. For example, you could make a photo similar to the image below by painting the texture on a sheet of glass and then shooting the subject through the glass. It may not be as easy as a few mouse clicks in Photoshop, but at least what you end up with is a photo. As a bonus, you may learn some things about lighting, controlling reflections, etc..

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

But heck, if you want instant gratification without any effort, as so many do these days, then you may want to stick with Photoshop's gimmick filters. To each his own. :D


Without resorting to personal insults as so many are doing in this discussion. I'll try to make my point.

This shot: ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/902/120/707632.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/902/120/707632.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' is in my opinion (course i'm its father so i'm going to think its good) was a good shot before I added the 1's and 0's overlay on my face. The lighting, composition, and contrast were all there BEFORE that overlay. In the absense of buying an overhead-projector or writing them on my face which wouldn't have looked as "computerized" I used an overlay to get the look i wanted for my picture.

According to you EVERYONE that uses textures and overlays does not know how to use there camera. To the contrary. Judi[user]27133[/user] and Roz[user]67145[/user] and Yanko and the hundreds of other people on here that use textures and overlays are good "artist" as you put it and DO know their camera.

Photography by the very nature that it is digital now instead of film has CHANGED. I'm not really into 'Digital Art' either but perhaps in a different rule set than the current Advance editing rule set overlays and textures would be fine?

Can everyone agree that we can have a compromise of some sort?!?!

Message edited by author 2008-08-18 12:29:19.
08/17/2008 07:49:25 PM · #19
grrr...Why don't I ever have time to follow a thread like this when it's still making progress? ;)
08/17/2008 07:35:53 PM · #20
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by JustinM:

Originally posted by Jac:

You cannot have a challenge where textures/overlays will be used and expect to place well. These overlayed images will crush the regular images that aren't texturized or overlayed, mostly, because of their eye-candy appeal.


I totally disagree. Have you been reading this thread? There definitely are many people just in this thread that have expressed disapproval to allowing textures. Do you think they are going to vote those kinds of photos high when their are great non-textured or overlayed photos? Just because your using an overlay does not mean your photo will be scored higher. Just like any other element to creating a photograph, overlays have to be applied relevantly and properly for them to add and not detract from an image.


I do believe having texture overlay entries in the regular advanced editing ruleset would cause issues. In the above quotes I think both of you are correct. If a challenge was run with both styles of entries you'll have those that love the texture stuff and may vote them higher to offset the dings from those that dislike them (it happens whether you want to recognize it or not). In the end a challenge run with both styles would cause more harm to the DPC community than good IMO.

BTW Justin...question for you. Does the texture overlay hurt or help the following image (in response to your quote "overlays have to be applied relevantly and properly for them to add and not detract from an image").

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

While you're taking a look at this photo, read the comments...a mixed crowd on like/dislike it seems - and that's just in a side challenge. Think of the polarizing opinions in a challenge (verbalized via a comment or not)!

Opposing opinions on a techinique or a finished image is not inherently "polarizing" - lots of people can respect opposing points of view. What IS polarizing is the refusal of some to accept opposing opinions as even being valid.

Just following this thread off and on and it really seems like it lost any progress a long time ago. Didn't someone suggest "just take a poll"? So take a poll.
08/17/2008 07:35:39 PM · #21
Originally posted by glad2badad:


BTW Justin...question for you. Does the texture overlay hurt or help the following image (in response to your quote "overlays have to be applied relevantly and properly for them to add and not detract from an image").

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25000-29999/27133/120/647560.jpg', '/') + 1) . '



Without seeing the original photo it is difficult for me to determine whether or not the overlay does the image good. Based on my personal tastes for imagery I would tend to say that the original or the original processed some other way would be more appealling. In this case based on my own set of criteria I would say the overlay hurts the image but outside of DPC it would depend on the context in which the image is shown or displayed and/or for what purpose it was created.

I do not mean to sound harsh or offensive and I apologize if I have "sounded" that way earlier. In this situation even where I don't prefer the overlay result I would greatly respect the freedom to use overlays if that is the decision that is made as a result of discussions like this.
08/17/2008 07:21:46 PM · #22
What has astonished me the most, and very much to my surprise, in this thread, is the dividing tone it has taken. The we vs them attitude just makes me wanna hurl.
08/17/2008 06:26:10 PM · #23
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Sounds like the expert editing ruleset isn't needed then at all - Hooray!


I visit these forums once every few months and nothing really changes at all. Mista Glad-dad is still pushing his anti-expert editing campaign with full vigor. Doesn't it get a little tiring after a while? Oh well, got better things to do, I'll have another look in a cuppla months or so to see the forum changes that won't happen :)
08/17/2008 06:18:04 PM · #24
Originally posted by krnodil:

since when does the possibility of generating polarizing comments/votes factor into whether said image should be allowed in a challenge or not?!

It doesn't.
08/17/2008 05:45:25 PM · #25
since when does the possibility of generating polarizing comments/votes factor into whether said image should be allowed in a challenge or not?!
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 03/28/2020 11:32:59 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 03/28/2020 11:32:59 AM EDT.