Official Photography Thread: Vol. ICan'tFindTheLastOne

[ntdfx]

Here are some of mine, they're all in thumbnails.

Random shot of a seagull during a BBQ with some friends.


Some shots while I was in Michigan over the summer.
- - - - - - - -

Shot of Century in the Westfield mall in San Francisco.

 

[purple face]

Some new and old stuff

 

[the black james bond]

dope pics Purple Face

 

[j2o]

Sup_

Peace.

 

[chrisgp20]

Some pics from the Irish coast.

And I call this one "Bokeh Love" - it was on the front page of Flickr, which pleased me.

 

[jhova718]

purple face.....you go to hunter? cool i went there last semester and hopefully next one....and i live close to you too i spy the Grand Central and 65thstreet....

 

[raburns04]

some really nice stuff on this page . . . is that grand rapids, ntdfx?

 

[j2o]

Sup_

chrisgp20

Whats up bro?! Hows it going. Long time no see.

I didn't know you had skills on the camera too. Good stuff man.

Peace.

 

[kdwallace]

thanks man yeah i really dont need the range. so a prime lens might work better for me but i dont think there is a prime lens that works with the autofocus on d40x is there?

The Nikon ones don't work on the D40 - Sigma make a f1.4 30mm prime that will work but I have no idea how much it is.

 

[arsene knows]

heres some of mine.

a needle in space: (my wallpaper)

sand angels:

who needs gravity:

i see you seeing me:

i take all my pics in 10 megapixel, panorama, so they fit well as wallpapers on my widescreen.

oh yea. and why take pictures if you're going to use photoshop?

i'd rather take decent photographs with my own skill than produce

photographs with photoshop.

 

[j2o]

Sup_

Why bash PS.

I've always said this and I am a firm believer in PS. When you cannot achieve a certain look
with your photos. Thats where Photoshop comes into play. They go hand and hand.

It does not make your pictures any uglier or does not make you any better if you do not use PS.

Ehh. whatever.

I like all pics PSed or not.

Peace.

 

[arsene knows]

Actually, it does make you a better photographer if you dont use Photoshop. That's why magazines like National Geographic don't allow Photoshoppedpictures into their magazines. You can like the pictures whether they are photoshopped or not, but the measure of a photographer lies in him/her and thecamera, it doesn't extend to their photoshopping skills.

I'm not knocking pictures that are PSed, but call it what it is and state that they are. It's like taking pictures on steroids, put an asterisk onthem.

Just know that what you do with Photoshop, other people can do with just their camera.

 

[ebayologist]

^I know where you're coming from for instance I can't stand HDR they look like luminism paintings. But I find it hard to hear from some who shootsdigital...

If you shoot film with a fully manual camera, process your film by hand, and develop your photographes manually in a darkroom. Then you really have room tospeak about the encroachment of digital technology on art. That it's computer aided and that takes away from the technical skill of the photographer as anartist. But thats not the case for you so in essence you have little ground to walk on in calling out someone who photoshops their work. You can not like itand you're more than welcome to say you don't like it... But you don't have ground to stand on saying people need to put asterisks on their photosthey photoshop...

So while I see your point and myself I tend to avoid digital manipulation as much as possible for a number of reason. You're in no position to make thatarguement as overt or zealously as you have... Because for starters you shoot with a digital camera, that alone makes your arguement completely moot point asI'm sure your camera can create a number of non-real effects that and/or provides aid to you in shooting that a fully manual film camera wouldn't...

And even more to point statements like..

"Oh yea. and why take pictures if you're going to use photoshop? i'd rather take decent photographs with my own skill than produce photographswith photoshop"

Are completely unnecessary. You can critique or make commentary things without making such overt "attacks" on peoples work or methods. Like "Idon't get why people photoshop their work so much..." instead of saying in essence people who photoshop lack skill... I mean end of the day I couldrip on your photos all day... and say any number of valid criticism of you work and be just mean and nasty about it and essentially put you to shame. But Idon't because unlike alot of threads on NT in the photography thread we keep things respectful and adult... So do me and the rest of us a favor and trykeeping the thread that way.

 

[DonRafa]

How does not using PS make you a better photographer? If your a good photographer, your a good photographer. It doesn't matter if you use PS or not. Ps issimply a tool used to achieve a desired effect, much like the way you set up lights in a studio, or the use of alternative processes if you use film. You stillhave to be able to compose and capture an image that is visually interesting.

And if you think that everything you do in PS can be done with just a camera, they you don't know how to use PS.

 

[chrisgp20]

Originally Posted by j2o

Sup_

chrisgp20

Whats up bro?! Hows it going. Long time no see.

I didn't know you had skills on the camera too. Good stuff man.

Peace.

I just dropped by and saw this thread - thought I'd join. Some nice stuff in here. Nice to see you representing the Mac!

 

[raburns04]

oh yea. and why take pictures if you're going to use photoshop?

i'd rather take decent photographs with my own skill than produce

photographs with photoshop.

i understand what you're saying to a point, and i try to do less and less with photoshop and lightroom as i learn more about photography . . . but doyou bash film photographers/developers who dodge or burn? who cross-process? who apply other darkroom techniques to their photos? i understand that softwaremakes these techniques a lot easier and tempting, but using photoshop can only do so much for one's photos. it can make a good photographer's workbetter, but it can't do too much for a garbage photograph(er).

 

[the black james bond]

with raburns and ebay putting dude back in his place...on with the pics

 

[arsene knows]

yay for photoshop. i have used it now and discovered it to be the single most greatest creation by man. thank you raburns and ebay for showing me the truth.

no seriously. Hold up. I never bashed photoshop. I did say why take pictures if you're going to photoshop. I didnt mean that your photoshopped pictures arenow worthless, I was more trying to get at photoshopped pictures should be labeled as such. I think the photograph happens when you click the button on thecamera, not when you upload and enhance with PS.



ebay "So while I see your point and myself I tend to avoid digital manipulation as much as possible for a number of reason. You're in no position tomake that arguement as overt or zealously as you have... Because for starters you shoot with a digital camera, that alone makes your arguement completely mootpoint as I'm sure your camera can create a number of non-real effects that and/or provides aid to you in shooting that a fully manual film camerawouldn't... "

As I use a digital camera, I don't use the "number of non-real effects" Unless you count black n white which = black n white film. Therefore yourpoint is a moo point. a cow's opinion.



rafsj "It doesn't matter if you use PS or not. Ps is simply a tool used to achieve a desired effect, much like the way you set up lights in a studio,or the use of alternative processes if you use film. You still have to be able to compose and capture an image that is visually interesting."

Sure. You bring up a great point. PS is a tool to achieve a desired effect. I totally agree with that. But let's bring it back to the sports metaphor,since we are on a sports forum. Football is a game played with certain rules and setups, much like photography has its cameras and lights. Steroids are used toachieve a desired effect, but lie outside of the normally accepted boundaries of the sport/art. PS is used to achieve a desired, but it too, lies outside ofthe normally accepted boundaries of the art. If you were to submit your PSed photographs to a photography monthly or even an art gallery. Good Luck.



raburns "but do you bash film photographers/developers who dodge or burn? who cross-process? who apply other darkroom techniques to their photos? iunderstand that software makes these techniques a lot easier and tempting, but using photoshop can only do so much for one's photos. it can make a goodphotographer's work better, but it can't do too much for a garbage photograph(er). "

No, I don't bash film photographers. I think dark room>photoshop. Lets think about it this way. Photography was invented way back when with a guy acamera and his little hood thing and his darkroom. As time and technology grew, we now have Polaroids and disposable cameras. In today's society, we haveDSLRs. I have found there to be unspoken rules about what the boundaries are in the art of Photography, and PS isn't in there. It's the thing you useoutside of art, and once you PS a photograph you should label it as such. And I agree that "photoshop can only do so much for one's photos. it canmake a good photographer's work better, but it can't do too much for a garbage photograph(er). " But you also point out that photoshop CAN doSOMETHING for the photo (albeit "only do so much" but that is something) It won't turn a ****hole alley into the Met quality, but it does dosomething. And that is exactly what I'm trying to point out.


I said that I'm willing to stick by my decent to rather juvenile photographs, because I want it to be about me, the vision, and the camera. A holy trinityif you will. You guys can use photoshop all you want. Just state it on the cover. "I USE PHOTOSHOP." If you have no qualms with using PS on yourstuff, then you should have no qualms about labeling it that way. Just like when you upload photographs and it states the Make, Model, Shutter Speed, F Number,Focal Length of the photograph, you should also add Photoshopped at the end. If you think there's no stigma behind it, then you should proudly label it assuch.

 

[ebayologist]

^ Your arguement is silly for a number of reasons, but just like to clarify for so you know.

B/W digital does not = B/W film. The sensor in your camera views things in color and then turns them to contrast, hence why it does such a poor job at it...B/W film is just that, its light exposed in contrast i.e. lights and darks. B/W digital is an effect... the camera doesn't actually view in B/W.

You use digital effects, crappy ones...

Arguement over...

And just for the record, I shoot medium format film with a camera (hasselblad 500series, 503cxi to be exact) designed in 1950 and develop the vast majority ofmy work in a color darkroom. I use the scanning of film (the only digital element I use in my photography practice) for 2 things. 1. To make contact sheets(its faster) 2. To get my work on the web.

So simply put you're like a an overzealous choir boy trying to preach to a saint...

So do me a solid and fall back... way back..

One last thing and then this is over, there is no need to respond to this, you just dig more of hole for yourself...

"If you have no qualms with using PS on your stuff, then you should have no qualms about labeling it that way."

You're right people should label things. That would be helpful for people label any number of things and if anyone wants to yourself included more power toyou and anyone else who follows suit. But you're in no position to come into this post and just demand it and make attacking comments about people whoeither don't label or use photoshop. If I said "Hey, I think people should label stuff it would be helpful" I think people in a large degreewould take heed. Why is that? because I've probably answered into the hundreds of questions and helped with the development and progess of a number ofdifferent people all that can be seen in this one albeit large thread.

So for you to come in here all high and might off the cuff with your admitted not good photos and make this demand is absurd. But more to the point I whatmakes this post so great as the diversity. The diversity of skill level of taste of medium of any number of things. Someone can post dog +%%# b/w digitalphotos and I don't care it doesn't bother me, this post doesn't have to be all film or all dslr/slr. I just don't think that matters and Ithink thats part of what makes this thread so great. Like I said orginally "anyone is welcome to post anything photography related (your own work (digitalor film), questions (camera, photoshop, etc.) ,work of famous photographers you like, really whatever photography related things you want."

So end all be all just let it be... You're not in a position to make any requests at all. let alone demand people place their as you see it what amounts toscarlet letter on their work.

 

[the black james bond]

*closes coffin* now can we get back on with the show? I think we can and we shall, here are few new ones from my flickr:

on my home...

I really liked this bike when I saw it...I wanted to steal it, but decided it wouldn't be that great of an idea, so I took a picture, I figured the picturewould last longer than the bike ever could

A portion of my block, dare I say, my kingdom

ANOTHER pool shot, what can I say, I'm addicted

Walking down Arch St...I pass by here everyday

My boy Mitty...you know how you try to emulate your fav photographer's work? well I ripped this from none other than ebayologist

again, all critiques welcome, I'll edit this later when I'm done color correcting some of the other ones.

 

[capo617]

Sick pictures on this page. Keep it up.

 

[irpstakid]

^^^ I think that the bike is too far off to the side.
I looked at the truck first.
I knew that the subject was the bike, but I looked at the truck first.

 

[j2o]

Sup_

Ughh. Yeah. Look what I started hahaha.

I do not think anyone in this post is claiming or "pretending" that their photos are naturally shot without PS.

Everyones adults here I hope... I am sure if it were PSed they would say it is when questioned, but why discourage it? Why
downplay it like its a sin to use Photoshop? What has Photoshop done to you? Bad experience? PS touched you in your secret spot?

I respect ART in every way. PSed or not. A dope shot is a dope shot.

I like this one BJB. Even if you shot it from the shooters angle it would be nice or if you focused on the shooter.

Only thing I dont like about it is the noise.

Peace.

 

[baller mayo]

very nice pics everyone

 

[thehbkid]

two of many favourite picture i took while in NEWYORKCITY during the weekend..

central park tour..Feedback from the pros would be nice..ive only been shooting DSLR for a couple months and still learning.