----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob W"
Subject: RE: Ethics of Manipulation (was: Re: Perspective control
(was:PESO:Church tower))
Bullshit.
Interestingly, I posted this almost nine years ago in reply to that
penultimate Presbeterian, Matt Grene
"Photographs by their very nature are lies and untruths. They sit
there, static representations of moving subjects. They lie in
two dimensions, making mock of the three dimensional nature they
claim to represent. They are black and white lies of coloured
scenes. They are off colour lies of colour scenes. "
It went on from there, but that is the gist of it.
Now being how it was Mafud, I was probably arguing for the sake of arguing
and trying to get a rise out of him, and he doing the same to me, I am sure.
William Robb
The act of taking the photograph is an act of manipulation and is
therefore always "dishonest"
YOU CHOOSE what to include in every photograph you take and what to
exclude. YOU CHOOSE the angle it is shot from. YOU CHOOSE
the subject
matter, etc etc etc.
All these CHOICES are "manipulating" the photograph and telling the
story that YOU want to tell.
Whether you do it by composition, in photoshop, or in the darkroom,
EVERY photograph is "dishonest."
--
Christian
http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/
Nick Wright wrote:
> Yes, it is. But somewhere along the line I came to view one as
> "honest" and the other as "dishonest."
>
> Not that it's that simple though. Because I think that a "straight"
> photo can be dishonest as well.
>
> Which is something that I've also been thinking about in
regards to my
> original photo. I like my shot quite a bit, but I cycled past that
> church again the other day and I realized that it is not an honest
> photo.
>
> The reason I believe that is because in the photo the tower
appears to
> be much taller than the rest of the building, when in
reality the roof
> line to the right of the tower in the photo is higher.
>
> I didn't think about it when I shot it, and then I didn't
think about
> it when I got the negs back.
>
> So what do you all think about that?
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Bruce Dayton
<bkday...@daytonphoto.com> wrote:
>> Isn't just changing the lens or the angle that you take the shot,
>> changing the perspective? It would seem that if altering the photo
>> after the shot bothers you, then altering the photo before the shot
>> should to. Just different methods of accomplishing the same basic
>> thing.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>> Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 5:06:20 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> NW> Thanks to all the folks who took time to comment on
this last PESO of
>> NW> mine. I do appreciate the critiques.
>>
>> NW> One item I'd like to touch on is the concept of
software perspective
>> NW> control. I'd been thinking about this recently before
I'd posted my
>> NW> PESO and then Brian brought it up in his critique of my image.
>>
>> NW> I'm just amazed at how fast technology changes. The
last time I was an
>> NW> active member of this list (granted that was 8 years
ago) the only way
>> NW> to achieve perspective control was with a view camera
or shift lens.
>> NW> Now you can get something of the same effect using photoshop.
>>
>> NW> I don't currently have any software with the ability
to "correct"
>> NW> perspective, but an older laptop of mine had Elements
2 which did. I
>> NW> played around with it a bit but never could really get
my heart into
>> NW> it.
>>
>> NW> I think it mainly has to do with all those years at
the newspaper. Any
>> NW> alteration of a photograph like that just makes me cringe.
>>
>> NW> I'm curious to hear more of you all's opinions on the process?
>>
>> NW> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Brian Walters
<supera1...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>> Nice composition but the tower gets a bit lost in the
background sky.
>>>>
>>>> Also, I'd try a bit of perspective correction to make
the verticals
>>>> vertical and the horizontals, er...horizontal. It may not be an
>>>> improvement but worth investigating.
>>>>
>>>>
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
