All Forum Comments
Go go go Guys - lets get the photographers out here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 02/06/2010 - 20:45
johnriley wrote:
It's in hand, don't worry, and comments will be posted ASAP.
John any news or am I looking in the wrong place. No hassle if nothing forthcoming.It's in hand, don't worry, and comments will be posted ASAP.
Comment by ISO posted on Discussion Weekly Comp 150 - Life In Motion at 02/06/2010 - 18:38
Stefan - I think all those would look great in Tate Modern, but they aint what I call photography
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 02/06/2010 - 18:30
[quote:3496ace15f="Anvh"]
When you think about it, no where does it say a photo must be true to life.
quote]
No true, but nowhere does it say that an orange must be round, and well orange coloured. It’s just an accepted principle. In my book a photograph is essentially a record of a physical occurrence (unless you are snapping ghosts).
The camera is the medium but the message is the subject, not the photographer. The message only becomes the photographer when they significantly manipulate the subject to interpret what they want.
So coming back to Barrie’s original question, no I would not like to see a competition that relied on heavy PP.
I guess we all will have to agree to disagree.
When you think about it, no where does it say a photo must be true to life.
quote]
No true, but nowhere does it say that an orange must be round, and well orange coloured. It’s just an accepted principle. In my book a photograph is essentially a record of a physical occurrence (unless you are snapping ghosts).
The camera is the medium but the message is the subject, not the photographer. The message only becomes the photographer when they significantly manipulate the subject to interpret what they want.
So coming back to Barrie’s original question, no I would not like to see a competition that relied on heavy PP.
I guess we all will have to agree to disagree.
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 02/06/2010 - 15:39
Oh Dear - Just back from the meeting going to bed. Could we possibly come back to my point about what is a photograph as opposed to what can be a photographic basis which is then turned into an artwork / graphic/ daydream. Night night.
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 01/06/2010 - 23:50
Hi guys I have to leave for a meeting but for now I think we are getting into language and definitions. There comes a point when the original meaning of a word is stretched so far that another description has to be found for it.
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 01/06/2010 - 19:06
What changed your mind:
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 01/06/2010 - 18:28
Stefan - A question of degree - Lets ask you - at what stage of manipulation do you think something no longer is a photograph?
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 01/06/2010 - 18:22
TOZZA27 wrote:
I`m a bit wary of this topic as I consider any photographic meddling - other than that which John has just mentioned - to be altering beyond the true image taken.
Tony
I totally agree with Tony. I don't own a copy of Photoshop. Apart from aforementioned tweaks, everything I have is 'straight out of the oven'. IMHO anything else is creative graphics - not photography. (Sound of stamping foot)I`m a bit wary of this topic as I consider any photographic meddling - other than that which John has just mentioned - to be altering beyond the true image taken.
Tony
Comment by ISO posted on Competition Topics at 01/06/2010 - 18:07
I think you may have been unlucky - as people imply the price was right but the E+ wrong. Over some time I have bought a Tokina ATX 28/70 2.8 a Pentax SMC FA 100 Macro 2.8 and a Tammy 500 Mirror from them without any problems.
Comment by ISO posted on Scratch front SMC-A 35-105 at 01/06/2010 - 17:14
