I think that Bruce was using my pic as a platform to show what COULD be done, rather than saying that it was what SHOULD be done. I can see myself using some of the tools he demo'ed (he sent me a rather fuller explanation of what he did than he gave on the list) in some circumstances. If you take a picture of somebody young and pretty, you don't necessarily want to show her warts and all (not if you want to see her again, anyway!).

Actually, I think he has preserved and enhanced the rather delicate, fragile, look that I was aiming for. I am sure that when Imane sees Butch's version she will be delighted.

By the way, here is a snap of her daughter, Nour:

http://www.johnpforbes.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/htm/_IGP9403.jpg

John




On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 19:07:56 -0400, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I've responded to Butch privately on this. What he did, and especially
his explanation of it, is very interesting to me and very helpful. I am a
complete novice at this, and find the huge number of tools available even
in the cut-down versions of PS to be rather intimidating. It is good to
see some specific examples of what can be done in a real-world case.



I must admit, my feelings about the "cleansing" of your model, John, likely have to do with what I try to do with my photography: at the rist of sounding completely pretentious (who, me? <LOL>), I try to capture reality.

That means capturing whatever I'm photographing, warts, wrinkles and
all.  Not that I ~look~ for those things, but if they're there, and
they end up on film, they're in my photograph.

Not to perpetuate a silly comparison made a few weeks ago, but some
may remember that a most respected list member dared to mention Diane
Arbus and your humble servant in the same breath.  I must confess to
not being all that familiar with her work (I mean, I've leafed through
a few of her books, but that's about it).  However, one of the things
I've heard said about her is that she seemed to go looking for the
warts;  that she went out of her way to present her subjects in a less
than flattering light.

I don't think I do that, but neither do I try to enhance what's in the
viewfinder.

So, all this silly rambling is to try to explain why sometimes I don't
pick up on the nuances of stuff like fashion photography or some types
of portraiture (like glamour stuff).  It's all foreign to me, so I'm
slow on the uptake.

To further ramble, all of the above is my verbose (who, me? <LOL>) way
of saying that I didn't mean to criticise either Mr. Black or his
photo as being ethically unsound.  As I told Butch off-list, my
reaction may have been much different had I not been shown the
"original" version, and only seen the "improved" version.

cheers,
frank




-- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 01/04/2005



Reply via email to