This one time, at band camp, "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That certainly gives me some "food for thought". Thanks for posting that > Cotty and Christian... > > "I hear the word manipulation forming on someone's lips. Yes, you're > right, > > converting a digital file to monochrome in Photoshop is manipulation, but > > photography is manipulation from beginning to end. Your choice of lens is > > manipulation; so is the way you frame, the shutter speed and aperture at > > which you shoot, your selection of Fuji or Kodak color film if film is I was giving some thought to this also and have had this debate often. My way of thinking about photography is that a photograph 'captures' a scene. We may use various filters, lenses, films etc to manipulate the light, but is this not what photography is? Painting with light. Artistic content is what seperates photographs from snapshots. A photographer with an eye can look at a scene and see the photo within. This may include the use of an infrared Black and White file, several filters and a macro lense, all combined to capture the image the photographer has seen. Any manipulation after the capture is secondary to the event creates a digital image. This could be in the dark room burning in, or on a computer removing an unwanted bird. I am not saying anybody is right or wrong in this regard. I believe in any means to achieve your goal. This is just how I distinguish between a photograph and a digital production. Kind regards Kevin -- ______ (_____ \ _____) ) ____ ____ ____ ____ | ____/ / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \____) \_||_| \____) \____) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
