jforkner Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Since you asked & and I’m sure I’ll start some sort of controversy, but here goes…
I guess I’m a bit of a purist and find the manipulation of this and some other night sky images I’ve seen recently “crossing-the-line.” For me, moving the MW to accommodate the foreground is just wrong. While I find it honorable that you mentioned that you did it, I don’t consider it a “shot”—it’s actually two.
I do find it acceptable to take & blend multiple shots of the same image to accommodate focus or exposure. But creating a composite of different images I have a problem with. I’ve seen a lot of this sort of thing lately, most notably at 500px. There seems to be a lot of night sky images with the MW obviously taken at a different focal length than the foreground. Or a gigantic moon over a city.
For me, if the scene didn’t occur naturally (or at least for the shot), it didn’t exist. And any attempt to “create” a scene is, perhaps, art; but it’s not “a photograph.” I will acknowledge there’s degrees of acceptability for this sort of thing, like cloning out a wire or some other minor objectionable object. But arranging the major components of an image to create a composition is a problem for me. Yes, I know painters do it all the time, but this is photography. Of course this is just my opinion which may not matter to you or anyone else; but you did ask for comments.
All that said, I like the image—especially the foreground. And had you not said anything, I would have assumed the MW did appear in that position.
Jack
|