The Age Old Debate
I don’t often link to other blogs on here, but I had to make an exception today. Samantha Chrysanthou and Darwin Wiggett have written an excellent article for Jay Goodrich’s blog on Photoshop and Nature Photography. The article deals with the age old debate of purist photographers and the biases against any manipulation from the perspective of a nature photographer. No matter which side of the debate you tend to lean towards this is a thought provoking read – and the images are worth the look alone!
Of the two photographs I’ve posted here one has had much more work in Photoshop than the other, yet it is the one that is more appreciated as a pure photograph. I’m sure you can all guess it is the top photo that has been heavily edited in Photoshop. The other is pretty much straight from the camera – except for the usual curves adjustments – yet this impressionist style photograph is the one most often rejected by purists because it doesn’t accurately represent the scene that lay before me. However, neither does the first image. It’s just more believable to purists.
It’s doubtful that an acceptance or understanding of the other viewpoints will ever be achieved. The camera is a tool. The user an artist. While some painters paint in a realist style, so to do some photographers; while others paint with a more interpretive or impressionist viewpoint. There is an audience for each style, and the many others that fall somewhere along the road between the two. Let the image speak to you, not the technical details of how it was created.
In: Creativity · Tagged with: camera, Creativity, debate, image manipulation, photography, Photoshop, processing, pure
on August 10, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Permalink
The final sentence is right on target.
We forget that oil painting was an invention. Somehow if it’s very old, it must be alright.