Asahi Photo Solenoid Repair Asahi Photo Solenoid Repair Asahi Photo Solenoid Repair

PentaxUser competitions

MrB
Posted 01/08/2012 - 21:27 Link
walkeja wrote:
"The process and practice of creating photographs is called photography. The word "photograph" was coined in 1839 by Sir John Herschel and is based on the Greek φῶς (phos), meaning "light", and γραφή (graphê), meaning "drawing, writing", together meaning "drawing with light"".

This is a description of the true meaning of the word "photograph". However, the meaning of the word does not in any way prescribe the methods used to create its products, so anything that anyone does involving light to create any image is a valid photographic activity.

walkeja wrote:
...this is where I am coming from as far as photography is concerned; "A photograph or photo is an image created by light falling on a light-sensitive surface, usually photographic film or an electronic imager such as a CCD or a CMOS chip. Most photographs are created using a camera, which uses a lens to focus the scene's visible wavelengths of light into a reproduction of what the human eye would see."

This is a description of two of the commonly used methods of capturing light, not the production of photographs. Photographic film and image sensors do not produce photographs - they simply record light levels (photons) - either by photochemical or photoelectric processes respectively. The photograph is produced by processing the recorded information - either by further chemical methods, or by computer processing. This must involve human intervention - either to apply the chemicals appropriately (or to design a machine to do so automatically), or to use software on a computer (or to programme a machine, the Jpeg engine in a camera, to do so automatically) - to reveal a printed or projected photograph.

However, definitions of photography usually also include its description as an art form. That is because it is generally accepted (at least it is amongst those who take it seriously) that the human intervention in the production of a photograph is not simply to produce something that is a 2-dimensional clone of a 3-dimensional scene. There is more to it than that, usually to do with human interaction and communication; the photographer's aim might be, for example, one or more of these ideas - to tell a story, to provoke thoughts, to convey feelings, to express emotions, to describe shape, form, space and time.
Many photographers spend time enhancing - in the darkroom and/or on the computer - the record of light that they captured through the camera, in order to realise an image that communicates their own particular vision.

It seems clear to me that the technical skills of capturing light and processing the recorded information, together with the application of creativity, are all required to produce good photographs. It is to be hoped that a competent judge would recognise the contribution of those three aspects to a photograph, when assessing its quality relative to others.

Philip
FAT8BIKER
Posted 01/08/2012 - 21:37 Link
Cats are smarter than there owners, no cat would keep a human as a pet.
Dave
Pentaxophile
Posted 01/08/2012 - 21:43 Link
Excellent summary Philip. It also strikes me that even if you are only aspiring to reproduce the scene as you saw it, some tweaking is often required - for example, where the dynamic range exceeds the camera's capabilities. The eye will not discern shadow areas as totally black, but if you expose the picture to retain highlight information in the clouds, that's how they might end up. Unless you have ND grad filters on you, some form of PP would be required to create an image which faithfully reproduces what you saw.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
greynolds999
Posted 01/08/2012 - 21:50 Link
FAT8BIKER wrote:
Cats are smarter than there owners, no cat would keep a human as a pet.
Dave

Tell that to mine. She only keeps me about for food, somewhere warm to sleep and to tickle her tummy. If she could get it somewhere else she'd throw me out!
Smeggypants
Posted 01/08/2012 - 21:54 Link
Gwyn wrote:
Maybe because the judges haven't seen the question to answer it.

Almost all digital photos entered will have been modified in some way, even if it is just resizing the file, or a touch of sharpening. If you scan a slide into your computer then you can modify that in the same way as a native digital photo.


You really do seem to have a problem with people using software on their photos. I can't see what is wrong with it - you can't make a silk purse from a pig's ear, and no matter how much you manipulate it you can't make a basically bad photo into a good one.

I would disagree. Often I've been looking through a shoot when I get home and look at what would be a bad photo and turn it into something pretty cool after some cropping and editing,
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Smeggypants
Posted 01/08/2012 - 21:59 Link
greynolds999 wrote:
gartmore wrote:
Despite having lived alongside a few cats I haven't much idea how their mind and eyes work but I do know a little bit about dogs. Show them a photograph and that is precisley what they see, a piece of paper, a screen or even a slide with coloured marks on it. Show them a cartoon dog on TV and they dont react but they do react to film of a real dog because they are tuned to recognising movement patterns

I agree that a dog will react to a moving image, but it wouldn't recognise a video of a dog as a dog.

Although I do have a sneaking suspicion that my cat is much smarter than she lets on!

Disagree there. Our dogs definitely react to videos of dogs and stills of dogs in pretty much the same way as they react to real dogs
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Pentaxophile
Posted 01/08/2012 - 22:39 Link
One of my dad's mates had a Jack Russell terrier that went mental barking etc whenever it saw police on TV :LOL:
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
johnriley
Posted 01/08/2012 - 22:49 Link
Quote:
So, how did you "sharpen" an image in the darkroom?

The answer is, maybe surprisingly, Unsharp Mask. Recorded in the literature in the 1930s and maybe even earlier, you make a second slightly defocused negative and print is slightly out of register with the original. Hence Unsharp Mask. The optical effect of this is to make the print look sharper.

That is why sharpening in Photoshop is called Unsharp Mask.

Edit: the other way with conventional film photography is, of course, to use a slower film. And yet another way is to use a harder grade of paper - more contrast looks like better sharpness to the human eye.
Best regards, John
Edited by johnriley: 01/08/2012 - 22:51
Smeggypants
Posted 01/08/2012 - 23:02 Link
Digital sharpening is simply putting a higher contrast on just the edges IIRC. Isn't it?
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
johnriley
Posted 01/08/2012 - 23:12 Link
Photoshop just simulates darkroom techniques, obviously it can't actually do them all exactly the same way. Just as layers are not actually layers of acetate on an overhead projector, but it can be useful in understanding to explain them that way.

As with many things, the more you know the more there is to know.
Best regards, John
tyronet2000
Posted 02/08/2012 - 07:54 Link
I think I read somewhere many of the symbols on the tool buttons in Photoshop originated from actual tools used in the darkroom (which to me remains a dark room) eg the paddles and the curled hand on the dodge and burn buttons.
Regards
Stan

PPG
Pentaxophile
Posted 02/08/2012 - 08:53 Link
Smeggypants wrote:
Digital sharpening is simply putting a higher contrast on just the edges IIRC. Isn't it?

Wikipedia wrote:
The same differencing principle is used in the unsharp-masking tool in many digital-imaging software packages, such as Adobe Photoshop and GIMP. The software applies a Gaussian blur to a copy of the original image and then compares it to the original. If the difference is greater than a user-specified threshold setting, the images are (in effect) subtracted.

[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Edited by Pentaxophile: 02/08/2012 - 08:54
walkeja
Posted 02/08/2012 - 10:18 Link
MrB wrote:




Many photographers spend time enhancing - in the darkroom and/or on the computer - the record of light that they captured through the camera, in order to realise an image that communicates their own particular vision.



Philip

Is this why in PS you can change the colour of a person's shirt, for example?
Pentax K1-ii and MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Pentaxophile
Posted 02/08/2012 - 10:21 Link
Why would you want to do that?

I must say, my own PP approach is generally limited to a little tweak of contrast and levels, and cropping/straightening.

Oh, and of course sharpening if I have resized the image.

Personally I hate manipulation for the sake of it, as in the 'keyboard' example you mentioned earlier. Again the question I ask myself is 'why do that?'
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Edited by Pentaxophile: 02/08/2012 - 10:25
johnriley
Posted 02/08/2012 - 10:22 Link
Quote:

Is this why in PS you can change the colour of a person's shirt, for example?

No, that's not why. The reason you can do that, if you can do that, is that you have learned to use one of the many features and techniques available.

Of course, you could buy a different coloured shirt instead.
Best regards, John

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.