...but is it photography?

P

porpoise

Messages
51
Edit My Images
Yes
So, I drove half an hour especially to the bluebell woods, shot off about thirty frames, and not one of them was really a keeper - they just didn't have any of that takes-your-breath-away bluebellness - you know what I mean.

So I fiddled with motion blur in PS for about fifteen seconds and came up with this, which I think looks very nice in a monet-esque kind of way, and somehow gives the effect of being in amongst a sea of bluebells much better than any of my rubbish, untampered with pics - but, there was absolutely no skill involved, just a couple of mouse clicks. So is it photography?


bluebells4.jpg
 
If you like the results then go with it.
For me, it's not my cup of tea. That's just one persons opinion though!
 
Yes, would have done it in camera if I'd realised what a flop my shots would be when I got them home!

At least this way I feel like I salvaged something from my trip. :)
 
Yes.

I would say there are two main styles of photography, Documentary (taking a representative scene) and Artistic (taking a photo and manipulating it into something else, be that similar (HDR, high contrast etc.) or off the wall (what you have done)).

Documentary is what most of us do, we take a shot, adjust levels, contrast and saturation slightly but thats about it (most wildlife shots and some landscapes).

Art is when you take a photo and go wild, adjust the levels/contrast/saturation massively or fiddle around with it in other ways to end up with something that may be recognisable for what it was or something that is almost impossible to recognise.

Both need certain talents, Documentary shooting needs good camera control and understanding but not necessarily too much need for creativity and pp, whereas artistic does not necessarily need good camera control and understanding (although it can be a plus) but more creativity and understanding of other techniques are probably used.
 
Is this not art ?


afghan-girl.jpg




I would say, the bluebell pic is more art than photograph...:)
 
Jayst84 said:
Yup, no arguments there mate. Like I say, if it looks good.. it looks good. Doesn't matter how you got there.

EDIT: Amp34's too quick for me, that was aimed at porpoise.
Click to expand...

And this. (laptop died before I could reply..):)

joxby said:
Is this not art ?


afghan-girl.jpg




I would say, the bluebell pic is more art than photograph...:)
Click to expand...

There are obviously overlaps, like anything.:)
 
I always think that it's totally up to the photographer to decide that. IMO though it's not, because there's so little of the original elements in it that it's virtually indistinguishable. Mind you, if you like it then that's all that matters... :)
 
I suppose that technically it's graphic arts rather than photography but it's a nice effect. As has been mentioned, it can be done in camera by moving whilst exposing. In that case it would be photography unless someone wants to come up with another term such as dynamic movement art!


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
I suppose that technically it's graphic arts rather than photography but it's a nice effect. As has been mentioned, it can be done in camera by moving whilst exposing. In that case it would be photography unless someone wants to come up with another term such as dynamic movement art!


Steve.
Click to expand...
But Steve, what if the OP had managed to take the shot and had moved the camera physically in an attempt to get that effect... would that be graphics art, or photography...?

Photography of course...!

If you like the image you take, that's all that matters... call it what you like I say.
 
There must be a point at which it is not considered photography any more (although I don't know where that point is).

As an extreme example, you could start with a photograph cropped to a square then in Photoshop, change it to one pixel high and one pixel wide. This will give a colour which is an average of the whole photograph. Print it out 8" square and you will have a uniform block of colour.

Is this photography? I would say definitely not. Somewhere in the middle is the point where photography changes to graphic art.


Steve.
 
Different people have different limits. But photography is art although some people don't like that fact!
Sometimes people don't like a photo because it's digitally enhanced, but you could have done this in a darkroom by moving the paper during exposure.

It is photography, because you can say it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top