Originally Posted by ajdroidx
You are right. Too much photoshopping, not enough actually "trying to get it right in the camera" (SNIP)
It irks me to see "photographers" going out with the mindset of "I can fix it later" or going out to shoot something and use photoshop to turn it into something else, and have it called "art"
, on Flickr
We use to photograph buildings filled with people milling about. We delivered prints with no people visible in the photograph, way back in 1920 or so. And, as you might expect, in 1920 or thereabouts, very few local computer dealers stocked Photo Shop.
How did we do this? Simple. Very Long Exposures. The people moving around did not register on the film but the fixed structures did. Not that we were smart; this was a common technique.
Jump ahead several or more decades when I left the Dektol filled trays for soldering fumes and a cubicle. I remember when the pros arrived to photograph our new building when we became part of 3Com. These two idiots spent two days or so photographing our building.
Not photographing our entire facility, mind you. Their task was to take a photograph of just the outside.
They would endlessly bracket, try different angles. these were a couple of idiots to be sure.
I took a photograph almost in passing after their entourage left. I used my Bessa Rangefinder and a roll of Plus-X. I had amazing detail owing to the larger format and I used a red filter to darken the sky and bring out the clouds.
The pro shots were crap and my shots were wondrous. My print was delivered the next day, their image arrived a month or so later.
Too many kids with no clue in the biz these days. They try to redefine the business in ways to make up for their complete lack of skills. They visually realize the old saw: "It's not a bug, it's a feature." It's not blurry, it is art.
No it is pure crapola. But remember, I am bitter, so there you go.