On 10/24/06, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is an interesting discussion. Since the first post, I have > 'fixed' the image to not show the reality that was there. I suppose > it would be helpful to know the circumstances a bit. > > This was shot on San Bruno mountain in a state park that is trying to > protect the plants and animals. So first, one would have to decide > whether to alter the foliage to make a shot that is different than > reality or not. Second, it was shot in early afternoon in very bright > sun. That means shooting much more like film - because I could barely > make out the review screen - certainly not well enough to see the > details that are deemed as less desirable. > > For myself, I tend toward things as they were, rather than altering > them. It is probably why my zoo shots still leave me feeling a bit > like a cheat. So a little natural flaw doesn't bother me as much as > some others. > > I realize that all picture taking is a manipulation to some degree or > another. The lens chosen, the exposure, the filters, the angle and > composition are all somewhat a manipulation of the subject. > > So does putting an insect in the fridge to make it sluggish bother > you? Does removing foliage or nearby plants bother you? Does > misting a spider web bother you? The list can go on. > > Thoughts anyone? Or shall we talk about aperture simulators? > > > Here is the original: > http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_3580.htm > > Here is the 'fixed' one: > http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/bkd_3580a.htm
Of course, there's no right or wrong answer - it comes down to personal preference and what one is comfortable with. There's no doubt in my mind that the altered photo is the more aesthetically pleasing of the two. Were it me, however, I'd use the first, as it is, indeed, "more real". I know that angle of view and lens/body/film (for us luddites <g>) are all editorial choices made by the photographer that alter the photo from conception. One wonders why it makes a difference whether such alterations are done post processing or before the shot's made (you could have bent down the offending stalk). I have to admit, all this "purism" is nothing more than the photography game I play with myself. I'm not a pro, and it don't matter; it's just the way I have fun. I don't criticize others who may look at things differently. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
