When making prints for someone else, it's good to accommodate them. When making prints for yourself, or that are to represent your vision and ideas (as an example, for exhibition), it's good not to compromise.
For the most part I like the way your photos appear on my screen. I've held off commenting on this latest batch, but intend to do so at some point. For me, a lot of what you do requires a second or third look, and some thought. I've still yet to figure out why some of your landscapes and flower shots work for me when the photos put forth by other don't interest me as much. I think I'm starting to understand a little more about that with this last batch. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bruce Dayton > Very good points, Shel. I do generally hold back a bit - many times > allowing more visible detail to remain in favor of a bolder look. > > Just yesterday I delivered some proofs to a client (family photo) that > were that way. I got the impression that they were a bit disappointed > because the images didn't jump out a you. > > It is good to hear many different opinions and ideas. Sometimes I > like to look at both aspects and mull them over before deciding. > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Friday, July 1, 2005, 5:53:37 PM, you wrote: > > SB> IMO, the changes totally ruin the photo. The subtlety and balance are > SB> gone, replaced by overly saturated colors and an unnatural look. Many > SB> "images" manipulated and adjusted in Photoshop are done with too heavy a > SB> hand. One of the most obvious issues with the adjusted image here is that > SB> the natural fade of the landscape, foreground to distance, is lost - the > SB> balance is upset and the result is unnatural looking. > > SB> One of the nicer aspects of Bruce's photography is that he doesn't overdo > SB> saturation and sharpness. His photos have a more natural look to them > SB> than, for example, the overdone, overly manipulated look of the adjusted > SB> example presented here. > > SB> The proper use of filters on a lens will often result in a more natural > SB> looking photograph than someone's idea of what a scene should be when > SB> interpreted through digital manipulation, which is often a Velvia-enhanced > SB> view of the world through digital magic. > > SB> Whatever happened to subtlety? > > SB> Shel > > > >> [Original Message] > >> From: Powell Hargrave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> I beg forgiveness from Bruce Dayton and all others who this may offend. > >> Just had to try some PhotoShopping :) to see how well I could make the > SB> blue > >> be gone. > >> > >> http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/Image7.htm > >> > >> Gradient mask with Color Balance and Brightness/Contrast. > >> > >> Awesome picture Bruce! > >> > >> > >> Powell > > >
