Mark Metternich
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
 Southwest Supernova | |
mstrickland wrote:
Mark Metternich wrote:
Yes, it is a blend. The moon was slightly out of the frame as well. I have always hated the look of the moon being an unrealistic speck in 14mm shots. I am rarely a literal type photographer. But having said that, I believe this image tells the story of what I was seeing at the scene quite well. I am sure some will dispute that. 
Thanks for being honest, Mark. Again, I was purely asking out of curiosity - not judgement. We\'re all here to learn and grow and there\'s no room for improvement if all we ever hear is \"wow, great job!\" I feel like we\'re not doing anyone a favor by not giving our own personal tastes and beliefs, whether or not the artist agrees.
I\'m glad you are open to discussion regarding the technical aspects of your imagery. No disrespect.
Thank you. Honestly, I did not feel disrespected at all.
I am traveling a LOT right now and have not been able to keep an eye on the goings on here very much. I would have addressed it earlier... In fact in a couple days I might not be able to address anything because I will be in very remote areas for an extended time. But I will try.
I\'m glad you are open to discussion regarding the technical aspects of your imagery. No disrespect.
Sure. I love teaching or sharing approaches.
As some might wrongly pre suppose, I have nothing to hide, or feel I have to \"come clean\" (as some else insinuated) about, or feel insecure about in my processing approach or style. I also do not feel the need to adhere to the obligation of giving people a detailed list of what was and was not done to an image in its initial posting.
Honestly (for better or worse) on all the other forums I post on, we just put our images out there and let them stand or fall on their own merits. Various blending, selective highlight glow effects, maybe a re-defining of a horizon line, separate adjustments for land and sky, maybe creative white balance, a warp or skew or liquify of a cloud or sky, color adjusting or whatever (ad infinitum...) is more often presupposed (that it may have been part of the workflow) these days. But if people ask a direct question like: \"did you augment or move that moon?\" or \"Is this a blend?\" or \"did it look like that to your eye?\" or whatever... then we simply share what we did. No biggie.
I personally know a lot of people that are on this forum or used to be on this forum and we have very often talked in great length about this subject. I think the last time in some length was with Aaron Feinberg via phone (great guy BTW!). We mostly agreed (a little appalled sometimes of how extreme some people are manipulating images today and then trying to pass them off as a single exposure) but we had our disagreements as well. It is quite a debatable subject with different philosophies on it and no one is the authority IMO.
But as much as I am sure it will likely get debated here (and maybe even intensely) because this forum seems to have a lot of quite differing opinions, I don\'t adhere to what I might call a \"list\" approach. A list of all the tweaks and effects and blends and whatever you did to an image (listed in the initial post). If the owner and managers of this site decided to strictly require that in their code of conduct, then sure no problem. But as is, I am more in the camp of \"show the photo\" maybe tell some background to it, and then let people ask about the specifics if they are interested. I remember once posting the processing details to an image on a forum years ago and one of the main people on the forum literally saying \"Spare me the details! An image stands of falls on its own merits. If I want to know the details I will ask.\"  . But that has always sort of stuck with me. When my favorite photographers like Alex Noriega, or Marc Adamus, or whoever post, I don\'t expect the break down of creative post processing techniques applied to the image, to be listed. But if I ask and get an answer, it is always nice to learn from what they did, or do, or their approach.
|
