Processing is necessary, ... but when you are manipulating the lighting to be contrary to what could have possibly existed, then the implausibility of it is where things kinda \"cross the line\" for me in a PJ realm (artistic rendering, it\'s all fair game) as it\'s kinda hard to have key light orientation in both areas of backlit & frontlit and left & right from a single source (i.e. sunlight).
D&B is kinda \"gray\" but doing it to the degree that it would require more than one key light source in ambient lighting is out of bounds for me as \"obvious photoshop \" that can\'t plausibly exist in reality ... thereby it isn\'t in the spirit of PJ to be representative (interesting word, open to interpretation) of the moment in time.
The image of the girl ... looks incredibly staged (and more fake/incongruent lighting), to me. PJ is usually construed by most viewers to be indicative of what you would have seen, had you been there. For me, while they may convey the spirit of the moment, I think the images have been altered, manipulated or staged to their detriment, rather than their honest power that I\'ve always considered great PJ to be ... kinda blurring the line between a photojournalist and a sketch artist or art director.
Processing is necessary, ... but when you are manipulating the lighting to be contrary to what could have possibly existed, then the implausibility of it is where things kinda \"cross the line\" for me in a PJ realm (artistic rendering, it\'s all fair game) as it\'s kinda hard to have key light orientation in both areas of backlit & frontlit and left & right from a single source (i.e. sunlight).
D&B is kinda \"gray\" but doing it to the degree that it would require more than one key light source in ambient lighting is out of bounds for me as \"obvious photoshop \" that can\'t plausibly exist in reality ... thereby it isn\'t in the spirit of PJ to be representative (interesting word, open to interpretation) of the moment in time.
The image of the girl ... looks incredibly staged (and more fake/incongruent lighting), to me. PJ is usually construed by most viewers to be indicative of what you would have seen, had you been there. For me, while they may convey the spirit of the moment, I think the images have been altered, manipulated or staged to their detriment, rather than their honest power that I\'ve always considered great PJ to be ... kinda blurring the line between a photograph and a sketch artist or art director.
Processing is necessary, ... but when you are manipulating the lighting to be contrary to what could have possibly existed, then the implausibility of it is where things kinda \"cross the line\" for me in a PJ realm (artistic rendering, it\'s all fair game) as it\'s kinda hard to have key light orientation in both areas of backlit & frontlit and left & right from a single source (i.e. sunlight).
D&B is kinda \"gray\" but doing it to the degree that it would require more than one key light source in ambient lighting is out of bounds for me as \"obvious photoshop \" that can\'t plausibly exist in reality ... thereby it isn\'t in the spirit of PJ to be representative (interesting word, open to interpretation) of the moment in time.
The image of the girl ... looks incredibly staged (and more fake/incongruent lighting), to me. PJ is usually construed by most viewers to be indicative of what you would have seen, had you been there. For me, while they may convey the spirit of the moment, I think the images have been altered, manipulated or staged to their detriment, rather than their honest power that I\'ve always considered great PJ to be ... kinda blurring the line between a photograph and a sketch artist. But, there is also a diff between a photo contest and true PJ.
Processing is necessary, ... but when you are manipulating the lighting to be contrary to what could have possibly existed, then the implausibility of it is where things kinda \"cross the line\" for me in a PJ realm (artistic rendering, it\'s all fair game) as it\'s kinda hard to have key light orientation in both areas of backlit & frontlit and left & right from a single source (i.e. sunlight).
D&B is kinda \"gray\" but doing it to the degree that it would require more than one key light source in ambient lighting is out of bounds for me as \"obvious photoshop \" that can\'t plausibly exist in reality ... thereby it isn\'t in the spirit of PJ to be representative (interesting word, open to interpretation) of the moment in time.
The image of the girl ... looks incredibly staged (and more fake/incongruent lighting), to me. PJ is usually construed by most viewers to be indicative of what you would have seen, had you been there. For me, while they may convey the spirit of the moment, I think the images have been altered, manipulated or staged to their detriment, rather than their honest power that I\'ve always considered great PJ to be ... kinda blurring the line between a photograph and a sketch artist.
Processing is necessary, ... but when you are manipulating the lighting to be contrary to what could have possibly existed, then the implausibility of it is where things kinda \"cross the line\" for me in a PJ realm (artistic rendering, it\'s all fair game) as it\'s kinda hard to have key light orientation in both areas of backlit & frontlit and left & right from a single source (i.e. sunlight).
D&B is kinda \"gray\" but doing it to the degree that it would require more than one key light source in ambient lighting is out of bounds for me as \"obvious photoshop \" that can\'t plausibly exist in reality ... thereby it isn\'t in the spirit of PJ to be representative (interesting word, open to interpretation) of the moment in time.
The image of the girl ... looks incredibly staged (and more fake/incongruent lighting), to me. PJ is usually construed by most viewers to be indicative of what you would have seen, had you been there. For me, while they may convey the spirit of the moment, I think the images have been altered, manipulated or staged to their detriment, rather than their honest power that I\'ve always considered great PJ to be.
Processing is necessary, ... but when you are manipulating the lighting to be contrary to what could have possibly existed, then the implausibility of it is where things kinda \"cross the line\" for me in a PJ realm (artistic rendering, it\'s all fair game) as it\'s kinda hard to have key light orientation in both areas of backlit & frontlit and left & right from a single source (i.e. sunlight).
D&B is kinda \"gray\" but doing it to the degree that it would require more than one key light source in ambient lighting is out of bounds for me as \"obvious photoshop \" that can\'t plausibly exist in reality ... thereby it isn\'t in the spirit of PJ to be representative (interesting word, open to interpretation) of the moment in time.
The image of the girl ... looks incredibly staged, to me. PJ is usually construed by most viewers to be indicative of what you would have seen, had you been there. For me, while they may convey the spirit of the moment, I think the images have been altered, manipulated or staged to their detriment, rather than their honest power that I\'ve always considered great PJ to be.
May 22, 2013 at 10:50 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #11571881 « News Winner's Overuse of Photoshop? »
