Re: And now... a fake moon photo

I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from Facebook, but this fake really pissed me off. I forget who the (claimed) photographer is, but that's just as well. This is allegedly an "antler arch" in Jackson Hole, Wyoming photographed at such an angle as to put the lunar eclipse right

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Ken Waller wrote: > And it's framed! At the Tate Modern, frames are needed to allow the janitors to distinguish the art from the garbage they are supposed to throw out. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- PDML

RE: And now... a fake moon photo

Mark Roberts wrote: > Total composite: One shot of a normal full moon taken with a super > telephoto and then tinted red in Photoshop. Another shot of the antler > arch taken with a shorter lens. Both pasted onto a black background > with no stars. In the last six months I've attended two talks

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

an now - a misattributed quote about it :-) On 9/30/2015 3:13 PM, jtainter wrote: I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from Facebook, but this fake really pissed me off. I forget who the (claimed) photographer is, but that's just as well. This is allegedly an "antler arch" in

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Knarf wrote: >To be fair, I don't think Gursky ever said Rhine II "represents reality": True. He always acknowledged it as being a massively manipulated in Photoshop. The Facebook photo was its creator as being a straight photograph. -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Rhine II must be great art. It is in the Tate. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Knarf wrote: > Well, here's what I think about Rhine II: I don't know. > > I've never really seen it. I've seen

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

And it's framed! -Original Message- >From: "Daniel J. Matyola" <danmaty...@gmail.comb >Subject: Re: And now... a fake moon photo > >Rhine II must be great art. It is in the Tate. > >Dan Matyola >http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola >

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

I'm not much bothered by photo-composites and image manipulation, as long as the photographer/graphic artist does *NOT* attempt to pass the resulting image off as non-composite/non-manipulated images. Plus, if you're going to attempt this kind of composite, you should pay attention to what

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

On 9/29/2015 11:07 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: The issue I have is when someone represents a composite photo as reality. Sometimes the composite image represents reality better than reality itself. The problem lies with the miss-representation of how that "reality" was achieved. Although, a

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Well, for one thing Rhine II sold for $4.3 million while this piece of dreck is on Facebook. Cheers, frank On 29 September, 2015 10:13:37 PM EDT, "P.J. Alling" wrote: >Though the technique leaves a bit to be desired, is this really any >different than Rhine II?

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

And that's pretty much the only real difference. We have two highly manipulated images, neither of which comes even close to existing in reality. Yet one sold for 4.3 Million, the other is posted on facebook. I'm neither defending or condemning either image, but neither is an unmanipulated

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Ditto. -Original Message- >From: "P.J. Alling" <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> >Subject: Re: And now... a fake moon photo > >And that's pretty much the only real difference. We have two highly >manipulated images, neither of which comes even close to exist

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

On 9/29/2015 11:07 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: ..(snip snip) The issue I have is when someone represents a composite photo as reality. Me too, P.J. I rather like RHINE II , actually. But then I like Kenneth Noland too ann On 9/29/2015 10:57 PM, Knarf wrote: Well, for one thing Rhine II

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

To be fair, I don't think Gursky ever said Rhine II "represents reality": "I wasn’t interested in an unusual, possibly picturesque view of the Rhine, but in the most contemporary possible view of it. Paradoxically, this view of the Rhine cannot be obtained in situ; a fictitious construction was

And now... a fake moon photo

I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from Facebook, but this fake really pissed me off. I forget who the (claimed) photographer is, but that's just as well. This is allegedly an "antler arch" in Jackson Hole, Wyoming photographed at such an angle as to put the lunar eclipse right

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

essage - >From: "Mark Roberts" <postmas...@robertstech.com> >To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 5:43:54 PM >Subject: And now... a fake moon photo > >I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

s...@robertstech.com> >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 5:43:54 PM >> Subject: And now... a fake moon photo >> >> I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from Facebook, >> but this fa

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Well, here's what I think about Rhine II: I don't know. I've never really seen it. I've seen representations and scaled down copies of it but before I can really comment I'd have to personally experience one of the six existing copies of it and spend some time with with same. After all isn't

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Stack focus with flash? J - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" <postmas...@robertstech.com> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 5:43:54 PM Subject: And now... a fake moon photo I'm normally averse to gr

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Though the technique leaves a bit to be desired, is this really any different than Rhine II? On 9/29/2015 8:43 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from Facebook, but this fake really pissed me off. I forget who the (claimed) photographer is, but that's

Re: And now... a fake moon photo

Xlnt... Cheers, frank On 29 September, 2015 8:43:54 PM EDT, Mark Roberts wrote: >I'm normally averse to grabbing other people's shots from Facebook, >but this fake really pissed me off. I forget who the (claimed) >photographer is, but that's just as well. This is