Tuesday
28Apr2009
Episode #87 - "Defining Photographic Conception" - In The Feed
Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 7:52AM Our latest episode, #87, is now in the feed and also available for direct download.
Which comes first - skill or artistry?
Show notes to follow soon! :)
- Aaron
tagged Podcast in TWiP Episodes
Podcast in TWiP Episodes 
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (9)
Silly question, Skill vs. Artistry. Skill amplifies artistry. Artistry is irrelevant without the skill to realize it. Skill is pointless without an artistic vision to achieve. A photographer needs both.
On the subject of skill vs artistry, My view is it takes technique ti execute artistry. The people who argue over artistry vs skills fall into two categories. Those who have no technique and those who no eye. They both don't shoot.
A few years back when I was working for a Scripts League newspaper. They got an AP Leafdesk which was used to receive and edit AP photos from a satellite feed. AP hand setup the Leafdesk so that it take two editors with passwords to authorize the use of the cloning tool. It sort of reminded me of like getting the nuclear launch codes. 6 Months later the first Mac came in with photoshop. It made it a moot point.
Really enjoyed today's show. In regards to the conversation regarding image manipulation and photo journalistic ethics, I have to agree with Ron B. In respect to exposure blending or HDR being ethical if not overdone. I want to take this a step further and say that HDR not overdone can actually be more true to what the photographer saw than a single exposure. In my opinion,high contrast scenes shot with a single exposure are much less "true to life" than an exposure blended image. Lastly, digital hdr is actually more like shooting film for those that make the rules. LOL!
@Jim M. - Exactly, the term 'HDR' should be used to describe the acquisition process. The choices the photographer makes in postproduction are unrelated, other than the fact that HDR capture extends the information that is available. But like you say, so does shooting on film. And using a flash is 'affecting' a scene a LOT more than capturing multiple exposures in most cases.
HDR is just a technique. It is not bad or good. The results can be bad or good. But, the technique itself is neutral. However, HDR does suffer from "garbage-in/garbage-out." That is, your source images need to be compelling to start with or no amount of HDR processing will help.
Hey y'all - this is Trey. My ears were burning as several people told me about this show!
Thanks for the good discussion and feedback. Very interesting perspectives all around.
I've since had a nice discussion with the judge that disqualified me and offered to help her define the rules for the next Smithsonian competition. I'm not mad about anything, just as confused as most people, I suppose.
I added a bit more to the article below. I added two more sample images that may or may not cross the line? The second one uses "Unsharp Mask", which is certainly a photoshop digital enhancement, but maybe even that sort of sharpening is over the line? The RAW importer now has that "Clarity" slider which is pretty darned close.
http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2009/04/22/controversy-tuesday-disqualified-from-smithsonian-and-oprah-grabbin-rights/
Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful discussion. It was cool to hear such knowledgeable people give their opinions on the matter.
I enjoyed the format for todays podcast where you had a main topic (image manipulation) and discussed it at length. It was interesting to hear everybody's slightly different take on the topic. Keep up the great show.
I'm always surprised when this debate comes up. As noted in the show. Darkroom work is no different than Photoshop work. IF it remains in the artistic realm. If we are talking about photo journalism then there should be some more strict standards.
If the camera can produce HDR images in body then that's just another technology available to the photographer. No one would argue that we should be using very low ISO film still. Why would we not use ISO 800 film? or Digital? In my mind It's simply the evolution of our equipment and skills.
I find it odd that someone has the time to record and type out the "show notes" that are actually a transcript, not notes, but it seems almost impossible to find simple links to the winners of the contests. I'm still looking for the winner of the "Complex" contest.
I asked about these photos in other forums here and there was no reply. (Between the comments on each post and the actual forum threads, it is hard to track discussions here, or know where to ask something and hope for a reply).
One would think that there would be a page here with each of the winning photos posted, seems like a good idea anyway.
Do we really need a word-for-word transcript that takes almost a week to post? Please, just give us the links you mentioned on the show, that you promised to post (links to PICTURES discussed on the show, that we'd like to see before the next podcast is out; those links should really be posted with the podcast).
UPDATE: I just noticed that, although you've posted the show notes, when one goes to your homepage here, the most recent (top) post says that the show notes will be posted later. I've been checking the main site to see when that would be updated and it hasn't been, even after the notes were posted.