Thanks again Paul, Christine, Jack, Charles and Ann for the comments on this.
Ann's comment is particularly interesting..... > well you fooled me on the processing... I didnt see the first one but > for this kind of photography I really object to > altering an image with that much removal... tiny objects that appear to > be dust or something is one thing, but removing > the stump, although the photo looks better , bothers me... the light is > beautiful, I like the contrast. The photo to me > is a nature reportage type... the stumps are clearly cut by humans, > etc... could be part of an essay on helping or damaging the > environment... but if you fiddle around with the images in photoshop... > welll... think of those extra missles in that news photo > recently - where the photographer added one or something to get a more > threatening image. > > ann (who just woke up and gets gabby in the morning ;) ) Gabby is good! This comment makes me wonder how much Photoshopping is acceptable. I think we all would agree about things like the Iranian's extra missile but how far should we go with more "everyday" subjects. I thought it might be interesting to get PDMLers view on this so I've stated another thread "When is a little Photoshoppery too much Photoshoppery". I hope we get a few comments. Cheers Brian ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
