Help Me Sort This Out……….

3 months, 3 weeks ago 7
Posted in: blog

 

 

One of the advantages of being home recovering for the past three weeks is time to watch the world react to the new stuff Adobe dropped on us a few days ago!  There has been no shortage of reactions from all over the scale from best stuff ever, to the end of the world as we know it!
The biggest objection seems to be can we believe anything we see in a “so called” photograph after this gets into full use, which it is already.  Let’s start with the statement that:   “ Photographs should be REALITY!”
So what is reality?
Let  me start with myself, are my photographs reality?
How about a few questions about that?
1.  Do I change lenses to adjust perspective?
2.  Do I use a polarizer to deepen colors and darken skies?
3.  Do I use a long shutter speed to blur water when shooting moving water?
4.  Do I adjust contrast with curves?
5.  Do I use content aware to remove distractions from my images?
If the answer to all those questions is Yes, then my images are already not strictly REALITY!
In what kinds of photography is it IMPERATIVE that the final image
Must be only what was there!
EXAMPLE:  My doctor has had me send images of the healing progress of my surgery incision. He wants the most accurate image possible to access the healing process!  If the edges are too red, INFECtION, if mercy pink good sign!  This is not a good image to photoshop, though I would like to tell AI to just heal it completely and be done with it, but, of course that is even bey0nd the scope of this software!!! 😉
These are the kinds of photography that demand accuracy:
Photojournalism
Scientific photography
Documentary photography
Medical Photography
Military photography
Sports photography  * For reportage
I don’t do Street Photography so honestly I don’t know where it lands?!
Kinds of photography that are currently straddling the line:
* I say straddling because I know a lot of these folks and they do at least as much as I do to improve their images. (*Most not all)
Nature photography
Landscape photography
Travel photography
Wildlife Photography
Americana photography
Kinds of photography where anything
Goes:
Portrait photography
Family photography
Commercial photography
Fashion photography
Advertising photography
Product photography
Truthfully I never believe almost any of these images are completely accurately reality when I see them, I’ve come to understand that is just the way it is!
So I have a plan I think will work for me, and I hope for you!
A.  I will shoot and process in the way that I am most comfortable with and will not judge anyone else that does not do it the way I do!  I further will  have not problem reviling to anyone who asks what I did to any image, just in case they want to know.  I will broadly call this a “PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGE”.
B.  I will accept that “Creating images either with the aid of software or fully with software as an art form, I will personally refer to as “CREATED IMAGES”
C.  All images that adhere to a strict Straight Out of the Camera, Unaltered image i will Refer to as : Photographic Reality.
As a believer, a practicing Christian, I will not demean any other photographer that chooses to work in any of these categories, or all of them, it is the artist’s choice and none of my business.  You have to decide for yourself! I love making images and when I’m happy with an image that is the final step, I don’t need likes, I don’t desire praise. I just like working hard at and seeing what I consider good work!  I want to encourage others to enjoy this glorious craft, I want them to love it, respect it and share it, if they don’t, cameras will go away, of course so will I, but I would hate to think of a world that we don’t capture our memories and the things we love and enjoy, and share them with others!
So, that is my take on it a nd the way i will approach it, give it some thought, and let me know where year coming from!
Blessings,
the pilgrim

7 Responses

  1. Jerry Reece says:

    Agree with your terms and explanations. I do “basically” reality types with only minor teaks to hue, contrast and saturation ( maybe a little removal of insignificant distractions) to perhaps give a more ideal impression of what I have seen, but they’re for me so who cares.

    I also do a lot of abstracts, serious changing, camera-in-motion, etc. These I refer to as photo impressions and where I spend most of my time. I always start with a camera image and I have no objection with alterations, AI, or otherwise as long as the photographer is honest about them.

    I do hope we find ways to insure that photos for documentation and preservation of reality, when that is the objective, can be maintained. We need to protect truth, not invent or deny it. Oh yeah, this refers to live in general not just photographers.

    Jerry

  2. John L Gompf says:

    Bill,
    I agree with you and Jerry Reece photographic images. I find this new AI software great for the creative (advertising) people. Although Advertisers usually stretch the truth or out and out lie about what they are selling. The downside to this software is alot of new photographers won’t both to try to take good photos with their came when they know they can manipulate them in the computer. It may also be they never take a photograph and just create one in the computer. You and I are of the old generation that had to learn how to use the camera (techincally) to get the image we wanted or saw. You just had no manipulation with film like there is today. There will always be people on both sides of the situation. Just do what you feel is best for your photography.

    John

    • Bill+Fortney says:

      I agree John, attitudes are very much tied to the generation we learned in! I hope young shooters continue to learn ad not totally rely on software!

  3. John L Gompf says:

    Sorry about the spelling mistakes and grammar

  4. Bill+Fortney says:

    You never have to apologize for that to me, my writing is full of errors!

  5. Dick Ginkowski says:

    Bill,

    Miss you at Grandfather Mountain, BTW.

    First, as you implied, every image to some extent has been “manipulated.” When Walgreen’s prints a photo for anyone it has been adjusted. Does it mean that it isn’t real?

    I think the better approach is the recognition that we are creating art, not photojournalism. I don’t consider it a “sin of photography” to improve what I saw or could be possible. Sometimes conditions today don’t allow safe access to what we could once shoot and we may need to remove intrusions that clutter our images. Where I would “draw the line” is when the adjustment adds something that is unrealistic and wasn’t there. Like pasting an airplane onto a lake or some other major manipulation. The trick, of. course, is definition. What you or I may think is impermissible someone else may embrace.