Breathing New Life .... ?

I wonder how many photoshop and similar software users have tried all the effects available, never more to click on that particular menu item? I have tried some while playing about and one image (not the Forth Bridge one on the gallery)I turned into an "oil painting" and printed out onto non photographic embossed (canvas like) paper and Mrs Snap really liked it
So what is acceptable Art? To quote another member, "Beauty is in the eyes of the beerholder"

I have sympathy for what you are saying here. I get similar feelings when I see HDR images - and the kind of composites that seem to have become so popular in *some* camera clubs.

Andrew

Nigel, I bet you now know how Pablo Picasso felt when he unveiled his work for the first time?

Picasso once said, " God is really only another artist, He invented the giraffe, the elephant and the cat, He has no real style. He just goes on trying other things"

Nigel, you keep experimenting and keep having fun, and let the elitists worry about their same old same, seen it all before pictures.

Nobody on this earth will ever agree on what is right or wrong or what makes a good or bad picture, What I do think we can agree on is that if the artist or in this case photographer has enjoyed creating something and if the final piece of artwork is what he set out to achieve in the beginning and if that has made them happy, then i would call that a success.

A question for paulyrichard: Do you own and use any Post Production Software?

The question is answered on the last photo he posted Which makes his comments on this thread rather confusing

MattyH I blinked so must have missed it

This is another very interesting thread, credit to Nigel for raising the questions, although I do think Ken was spot-on when he asked if Nigel was just 'pulling our leg' a little!

Nigel is very good at provoking responses, but not in a nasty way and I think some of the responses on this thread have maybe gone a bit over the top! My position is clear, I don't like the effects applied and I think they show little or no skill, but I disagree with paulyrichard's view that it is all about taking the photo right. Yes, it is highly important to get the right composition, exposure etc., but it is also important to process the shot effectively to maximise its impact and bring out the best features. I would bet that the photographers with a combination of the best eye for an image and the highest processing skill levels will consistently produce the best images.

Regards
David

Processing is an argument that will go on until hyperclaustrophobic cows come home. But the style of these is the cheap print of the cheap painting that graced grannie's living room. Or the kind of thing that are found in tourist souvenir shops. If you could press a button and get a Turner or a Picasso that's one thing, but with these you press a button and out pops a photo of a naff painting. It's not the subject or the compositions it's the style (or lack thereof). The photographic images underneath might be pretty good.

There's some dispute about that as well ! I've been told that my images are trash (he was referring to the underlying photos, not just the effect versions) and that I should delete the lot.

But I chose the images as examples of the type of scene commonly reproduced by oil paintings of this style. The merits or otherwise of a number of those photos have been discussed here in the past, and I'm not trying to revisit any of that. I don't recall paulyrichards having any opinion on them when they were 'just' photos.

I wonder why one hobbyist sees themselves as superior to other hobbyists and in the process make offensive prejudiced comments about a whole sector of people. Surely if you are enjoying your hobby and getting results that pleases you then can't other people just get on with enjoying their hobby and enjoy their results as well without being the target of some projection?

FWIW Nigel's experiments with PS effects doest nothing for me, but I'm sure their are situations where those effects will work artistically. Sometimes the end result works and it doesn't matter whether it was created with one mouse click or hours of carefully placed brush strokes .

I'm with paulyrichard 100% in what is quoted above and we all have our own personal disciplines. For me in my personal work as opposed to commercial work, I will never crop an image; I will discard it if it it isn't initially to my satisfaction. This goes back to my background in cinematography where it was never an option.

But I also agree with Smeggypants in that I don't object to other people doing whatever gives them image making pleasure.

'Mouse clicks...hours'? Give me a decisive moment any day!

Hey Ken, your cropping all the time! Whenever you change and shoot with a different lens you've cropped the scene of what will become an image...

Oh yes, you can all see me suffering here for my algorithms.


I'm starting to think here that, yes, this thread has been very revealing - but more so about the people contributing to it than about the actual images I've certainly been judged very clearly, but I am horrified to have 'tarred the brush' of the valued credibility of an army of passionate photograhy hobbyists, who will forever remain just where they are.

Well, I'm very grateful for the supportive comments and interest in the images and what questions they provoked. I hope that it has been interesting and informative, and yes, lets keeps experimenting and asking the questions!

My God, you are right! I need one of those Ricoh Theta things!