@282
Members: 66178
Elites: 219
 |
|
BlogItem
Category: Work in progress
Publish date:04/07/08 @862Editor:
|
Photography/Photomanipulation GuidelinesPhotography vs Photo-manipulation I want to get the differentiation out of the way first because when it comes to the quality issues, they will overlap, if not be identical. What makes an image a photo or a manip? Well, I've done some asking around of professional retouchers (and of course I have my own ideas) and the general concensus -- and I'm surprised that there was a consensus -- comes down to the intent of the photographer/manipulator (I prefer the term Photo Editor as manipulation sounds negative and with evil intent). The process to a great photograph starts with the click of the shutter. But even before then, the Photographer has made a few critical decisions that will affect the outcome of the image. In the strictest sense of the term, manipulation starts here: What aperture should I use? Should I add a filter? How long should I expose the image? Should I try zooming or panning effects? The term "straight out of the camera" gets tossed about as if any image just comes straight out of the camera. In fact, the closest to straight out of the camera is probably slide film, and only if you don't cross-process it. So manipulation really begins at the start. So should we consider every image to be a manipulation? Hardly. We need to talk about the intent of the artist. When I take a photo, I think it would be nice if I could just click the image, and bang! the most brilliant photograph is created. But I have a retouching background, and to me, every photo can be helped by some kind of post work. Whether it's to correct bad exposure, to remove a wrinkle, to add other pleasing elements. But the majority of the time when I click that shutter, I want to say something about what it is I am capturing onto the tiny little CCD thingy-whatsit inside the camera. I want to tell a story, describe a mood, put something (or someone) in a positive light. I want the viewer to get caught up in the image, not so much in the creation of the image. So even if I take a hat from one picture and put it on the head of a person in another picture (Sweet Melissa), or soften an image to stress a mood (Perchance to Dream), or add detail to correct a flaw (Prehistory -- in this image the eye was brought it from another photo because the original eye was too much out of focus), the intent is to for the viewer to see and relate to the image. On the other hand, if I the manipulation itself is part of the theme to the image (Ghost Porsche), or I am showing my skill as a retoucher through use of before and after images (Enlighten), then the intent is to showcase the manipulation. To bring attention to the manipulation. Outside of GFXArtist.com, many manipulated photos exist (and I suppose inside too) to fool the viewer into thinking it represents the real world. Here though, since we are all artists and come here for the teaching/learning environment, I think showing off the manipulation is a celebration of the art form. So keep in mind you audience here. They are not the general public. Many of them are you peers with the same experiences and education as you. Speak to them like a king would speak to a king -- with mutual respect. Place your image with this audience in mind. Do you want them to be engaged in the image or do you want them to be in awe with the technique? Neither is wrong. But putting the image in the right category is the first step to getting the comments you seek. |
emarts
Comments (1)
Post comment
To write a comment you need to be logged in
If you're not a registered member, click here to sign up.Search the site
Found a typo? Report it!
Copyright © 2000-2009 All rights reserved
Read the Terms of use and Privacy Statement.
This site is a property of Brothers in art For more information and support, contact .
Copyright © 2000-2009 All rights reserved
Read the Terms of use and Privacy Statement.This site is a property of Brothers in art For more information and support, contact .
03/02/09 @573
i'll tell you my experience about photography, and i hope to be clearely enough to explain it right.
Lets assume we are absolute beginners: in the beginning everything is new, to discover and we have to learn a bit the basics of shooting. Still in a second moment, we have to learn how to use our tool to get the right lines, forms, surfaces, volumes, colors, compositions. But the result is always academic and not artistic. (we try and test and learn always and only rules)
The true metamorphosis will begin, when we start to play with our knowledge and create something new.
Yes, i mean absolutely new- with an personal taste. The invention is the greatest challenge for an artist; if your work isn't free and guidet thrught your personality, (anyway if you'are more rational or emotional) you will get best results. I think so.
Oh. i forgot..for foto retuching:
everybody of us can help and learn from other artists..but i prefer to compose my own photo-collages with my own shoots and not to use and insert stuff from other people. I watch others, but its a natural way for find inspriation, nothing more.
I like the large range of languages in art- quantity is important too. But i agree with you that some "artworks" aren't to publish, because to poor in processing.