fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

FM Forum Rules
Landscape Posting Guidelines

FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1 2

end

Archive 2016 · Stargate

Bart Carrig
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · Stargate

I agree with Jim that the topic is worthy of discussion; I have photographer friends on both sides of the equation; I understand those who have mixed feelings. For my part, I always enjoy CK's truly naturalist and environmental philosophy, which shows wonderfully in his work and in his willingness to say what he thinks. In fact, I count on him for it. That's truly what "C&C" are all about. I have friends who, for example, refuse to shoot in Glen Canyon - notwithstanding its beauty - because it is not in it's natural state and/or it's natural beauty has been pilfered. It's been enough to influence me not to shoot there -- others are free to do so, and I don't hesitate to enjoy their work.

I guess the upshot for me is: hey, it's not personal. No one should take it that way; that's how other sites have gotten way off track. When you put something out there for "C&C" you can't always expect all "uhhhs and ahhhs. For my part, I'm not asking for a new sub-forum, but as beautiful as the image is, it's more in the category of eye candy, and I think most would admit, that is somewhat different than landscape -- even though it has all of the elements of landscape. Knowing the mixed feelings, if I were posting in this vein, I'd probably open with something like: 'I love this spot, couldn't resist the temptation to make eye candy.'

I don't see a "good 'ol boy" network here at all (and not just because a good number of the fine photographers here are neither 'ol nor boys). It's a good place for great photos and honest opinions.

Bart

Jun 12, 2016 at 05:53 PM

mp0363
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Stargate

probably as good as it gets. i've stood right there and wondered how it could be interesting enough to invest the time needed. you've answered that question for me. outstanding work

Jun 13, 2016 at 06:22 PM

mihind24
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · Stargate

Superb image, I really enjoy it, even though I know I'll never see something close to that with my eyes. I often make similar images, perhaps with not quite as drastic as a difference between the two source images. However, when I do do such images, my goal is to create an image which recreates the memory of the place for me. Taking your image as an example, as if I was there, the image is not meant to represent one single instant of time. I would have been there for hours, or all night. The memory of my stay would be somewhat like a compression of the time, with an image possibly showing multiple instants. When I look fondly back upon some of the evenings I've spent photographing, I usually don't think of a single moment of time, like 7:42pm, but rather, as a slow and beautiful transition from full daylight to full nighttime. That is why, for me, I'm completely okay with images like this. It's not that different from doing an extremely long exposure, or as is more common, many shorter exposures stacked together. It's like star trail photographs, but with fewer exposures. Yet I see no one complain when those photographs are posted, or "photographs" as some of you would say about this one.

Regarding the categorization of this as photograph or digital art, this is as much photograph as it is digital art. It is as much one as it is the other. The image would not be possible without the photographs themselves. Conversely, the image would not be possible without the digital manipulation of those photographs either. It is silly, then, to want to place it in one particular forum and not allow it to be in the other forum.

Anyway, back to your photograph, again, I must say, excellent work. Whatever you want to call it, whether it be photograph, art, image, etc., the end result is very pleasing to my eyes. And I can imagine how special of a memory it is to look back upon your time photographing there. I've spent a night photographing on the coast near Bandon, OR, and the solitude of that night, surrounded by a vast ocean and beautiful shores, holds a special place in my heart.

Jun 14, 2016 at 11:49 AM

voltaire
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · Stargate

Thanks for sharing the image and calling it out as a blend. I like the title.

Jun 16, 2016 at 04:53 PM

Arka
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #5 · Stargate

ckcarr wrote:
Did you invent that definition yourself?

That is why there is a forum here entitled Digital Art.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/50

This one however is the "Landscape Photographer" forum. It implies photography. And as far as this "blending" happening or taking place all the time here... That's simply not true. People get called out on it when a blend is obviously false. Some, of course get away with it, because they are clever.

I suppose I could find a picture of a wolf, or an elk, or a bear, and then blend it onto a cool cliff and post it in the Nature and Wildlife forum. I'm...Show more →

Ethics? Disclosure? Acceptability? Such heavy words! Is this conversation about judicial or political action, or a blended "landscape image?" Forgive me if I find concerns about the integrity of the "landscape PHOTOGRAPHY forum" a bit overblown... this "blended images" train (or "bandwagon" perhaps?) left the station about a decade ago, and I think most of us are accustomed to (and many even pleased by) the idea that modern digital landscape "image making" often involves significant compositing. Haven't we had enough tired debates about the "real" and the "false" in this space? Is DoF blending real or false? Are bracketed exposures for ground and sky, taken 20s apart, real or false? What if they are 20mins apart?

Nubcake, this is an interesting piece. I've been thinking about doing something like this with Pfieffer state beach for a while (I was hoping for moonlight through the gap), but I am enjoying what you've done here.

Jun 17, 2016 at 04:07 AM

fotografur
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · Stargate

JimFox wrote:
Hey Daniel,

It's great to have a vision for a shot, its something we all should have. But in this one the end result feels like two disjointed visions.

For me it's odd seeing that much gold light coming through the keyhole if this is twilight, I wouldn't have thought there would be any gold light to come through there at that point.

The biggest thing is the sky just doesn't match the ground layer and it feels like it was pasted on from even a quick glance. Perhaps darkening the blue of the sky to match the dark of the ground. As...Show more →

I'm not seeing that. Maybe because I'm lost in enjoying this beautiful image.

Jun 17, 2016 at 06:14 AM

JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · Stargate

Bart Carrig wrote:
I agree with Jim that the topic is worthy of discussion; I have photographer friends on both sides of the equation; I understand those who have mixed feelings. For my part, I always enjoy CK's truly naturalist and environmental philosophy, which shows wonderfully in his work and in his willingness to say what he thinks. In fact, I count on him for it. That's truly what "C&C" are all about. I have friends who, for example, refuse to shoot in Glen Canyon - notwithstanding its beauty - because it is not in it's natural state and/or it's natural beauty...Show more →

Thanks Bart. This is probably the most sensible comment in this whole thread.

It amazes me to see all of the outrage by people who are not even contributors to the Landscape Forum who are upset by the suggestion that this image could fit in the Digital Art Forum.

To those people who like this image and have no issue with such dissimilar lighting in the 2 halves of this image, that's fine. It's your opinion. But there is no reason or need to continually attack and insult those of us who don't like it.

Jim

Jun 17, 2016 at 10:51 AM

fotografur
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · Stargate

JimFox wrote:
Thanks Bart. This is probably the most sensible comment in this whole thread.

It amazes me to see all of the outrage by people who are not even contributors to the Landscape Forum who are upset by the suggestion that this image could fit in the Digital Art Forum.

To those people who like this image and have no issue with such dissimilar lighting in the 2 halves of this image, that's fine. It's your opinion. But there is no reason or need to continually attack and insult those of us who don't like it.

Jim

The most sensible....47 comments and this one that starts out agreeing with you. I'm seeing your opinion on this image and other opinions. Yet you're amazed by the people that don't contribute here yet it's very clear of your passive aggressive lines like "To those people who like this image and have no issue with such dissimilar lighting in the 2 halves of this image, that's fine. It's your opinion.". Do you see how this sounds? It sounds like if you like this kind of unprofessional work that's fine...Geez

Jun 17, 2016 at 05:21 PM

Paul Gardner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Stargate

"you did good" Beautiful Image, and don't fret the nitpickers. I come here very seldom because of the suposedly C&C which to me is the barely surpressed dislike of a presented image and a overblown ego.

Jun 17, 2016 at 05:46 PM

fotografur
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · Stargate

Jun 18, 2016 at 08:14 PM

JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Stargate

Paul Gardner wrote:
"you did good" Beautiful Image, and don't fret the nitpickers. I come here very seldom because of the suposedly C&C which to me is the barely surpressed dislike of a presented image and a overblown ego.

Actually what you are saying is not true at all. If you are not able to handle constructive criticism that's on you. 99% of the comments and suggestions given here are to help people and of course help ourselves. Because as one person grows we all grow.

Your description of "barely suppressed dislike" is so not true, and is really an insult to the regulars we have here that spend time daily being helpful. It's sad that you have taken such a negative twist to the time spent by many people to help others.

And if this forum doesn't work for you, that's okay. Not every forum is for everyone, there are lots of different websites and forums to appeal to all sorts of personalities. But since you and a few others don't appear to like the Landscape forum I just have to say I find it odd that you did have the time to come in here and post a message insulting the contributors here. Very odd.

Jim

Jun 18, 2016 at 09:18 PM

fotografur
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · Stargate

JimFox wrote:
Actually what you are saying is not true at all. If you are not able to handle constructive criticism that's on you. 99% of the comments and suggestions given here are to help people and of course help ourselves. Because as one person grows we all grow.

Your description of "barely suppressed dislike" is so not true, and is really an insult to the regulars we have here that spend time daily being helpful. It's sad that you have taken such a negative twist to the time spent by many people to help others.

And if this forum doesn't work for you,...Show more →

I agree with Paul on this one. And shame on you for saying that we are insulting the regulars here and cannot take constructive criticism. What was said was he (we) like the image and don't be bothered by the nitpickers. The people that critique every image to a point so it satisfies their own view not every contributor.
Are you the moderator of the landscape forum or do you feel it's your forum. Because that what it seems like at times. As a moderator do find your critique helpful when you write (like you did on the first page) t feels like it was pasted on from even a quick glance. Well I guess if you feel comfortable saying things like this good for you. I thought this was everyone's forum to come and go as they want and say what they want. Yet when people do you have no problem criticizing them and their opinion by generalizing their comment and twisting it to how you want it to read.
To be clear what you wrote is not what Paul said and what I agreed to.

Dennis

Jun 19, 2016 at 06:42 AM

jwalker
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · Stargate

STUNNING!!!

Jun 19, 2016 at 04:39 PM

Arka
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #14 · Stargate

What's surprising to me is the amount of (digital) ink that is still being spilt arguing whether something is a "photo" or "art." Also surprising (and far less interesting to me) is the debating the administrative question of whether an otherwise entrancing picture belongs here or in "city, street & architecture" or in "digital art, smartphone and abstract" (as if there's any reasonableness to that grouping of categories into a single forum).

It's hard for me to see this as anything other than a landscape image, even if it is an obvious (to landscape photographers) composite of images from two very different times of day. If this were lumped into the category of "digital art, smartphone, and abstract," I doubt anyone would even see it, let alone imagine on first glance that this image belongs in a forum with that random amalgam of subject headings. So is it "art" or a "photo?" Come on... People have spent so much time debating this question over the last decade, only to realize that (1) the line between the two is usually governed by personal preferences for which (2) there is no absolute correct answer. Yet somehow it's useful to re-litigate this question ad infinitum?

Jun 20, 2016 at 05:46 PM

JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · Stargate

Arka wrote:
What's surprising to me is the amount of (digital) ink that is still being spilt arguing whether something is a "photo" or "art." Also surprising (and far less interesting to me) is the debating the administrative question of whether an otherwise entrancing picture belongs here or in "city, street & architecture" or in "digital art, smartphone and abstract" (as if there's any reasonableness to that grouping of categories into a single forum).

It's hard for me to see this as anything other than a landscape image, even if it is an obvious (to landscape photographers) composite of images from two...Show more →

What is surprising to me, is the amount of digital ink you are using in complaining about others using digital ink in commenting here?

You put down the people who in your words are litigating the question as to whether this is a Landscape Image or Digital Art, yet here you are litigating it yourself by sharing your opinion. That seems odd.

And in the end? You don't even share whether you liked Nubcakes image or not.

Its funny to see the amount of people getting so upset because 1 person suggested that the image should be placed in the Digital Art forum because of how unrealistic it looks. It' amazing how much that bothered so many people that 1 person suggested it. Everyone in here can and should have their opinions. That is healthy. And I will repeat again, at the end of the day, despite the suggestion for this to be placed in the Digital Arts Forum, it sits here still in the Landscape forum, this thread was not moved. So why worry that 1 person suggested that it should be moved?

At the end of the day, I am sure the OP doesn't appreciate that there is more time and energy being spent discussing the rights of people in making suggestions, then actually discussing the actual image that was posted. And while the majority of the discussions have been civil, there is no point in keeping this thread just so every other day someone can get tweaked about the suggestion that this could go in the Digital Art Forum. It would probably be more beneficial if we all got back to work on our own Landscape photos. Hopefully all those who took the time to comment in here are also vested in the forum by sharing their own Landscape Photos.

Jim

Jun 20, 2016 at 08:18 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Landscape Photographer \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end