Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Australia' started by taranaki, Jul 8, 2018.
Two of my own favourites...
Jeez, nothing pink, and no sign of a goat, is this the "new tough" Troy being revealed ?
It's his artistic side.
If you think that beauty is in the eye of the cheque book holder.... that is fine.
I have a problem when the actual image is manipulated to a point where the subject became of secondary importance...
I always thought that the idea of taking a picture of nature was to immortalise the moment not to raped it to the extent that became an artefact... That's surreal and has nothing to do with nature... I think there are better suitable subject for that kind of photos...
To each its own...
Geez you got Troy started. Now he's posting selfies. Actually Diabolik is posting them for him.
I couldn't top that one
But the photo that you put up as natural has been tampered with and fairly obviously at that. Yet you thought it was natural.
‘Wollongong the Brave’ for the older ones. Aunty Jack opening sequence was filmed there I believe.
Norman Gunston just lives down the road these days. Gary grows oranges near Berry. Lots of celebrities live in the region, like Sidetrack and Dirtwanabee, sadly Rory never made it.
If you google Farewell Aunty Jack you will see the location in its Natural colours and be rewarded with an Aussie Classic... or you could catch the train from Kiama to Sydney and view it in person...
Please, do tell...
What camera was taken with? What was tamper with?
Last week I wandered around the Adelaide art gallery waiting for my wife to finish seeing the impressionists exhibition. Take home message for me was a decent artist can produce an amazing image using all types of different techniques and instruments. Sure, the market will change their visual preferences as new technology make " stunning" or " vibrant" the latest trend, but an artist with an eye and appreciation for light and composure beats a gadget any day.
Sometimes pushing a raw image to extract the colors that were speaking to you at the moment produces something " unnatural" but closer to what you enjoyed at the time. Just think about how your eyes start picking up details in the dessert that dissapear on film , yet can easilly be extracted out by " manipulating" a raw image to bring out the details that dissapear when we're back in suburbia.
Personally, I hate the overly saturaed digital imade that comes out of the average iphone just as much as I suspect you do, but I love taking the images my olympus produces then reducing highlights by 5-10% , pulling out shadow detail by 15-20% and darkening the image until it suits what I remember. To be honest, I could probably set this as my preferred setting on the camera and never bother manipulating a snap shot again...would you consider that wrong? Whatever camera you are using, there are algorithms going on in the background that adjust the image to what the customer thinks is correct. Even film brands used to manipulate the image to suit their customer ( fuji produced dramatically different results to kodak) .
Yes I agree, we all love to experiment and we all know that pictures like colours are a subjective think...
All I was trying to say is that on the first picture the photographer did push it so hard that it diminished the end result compare to the one that I posted were the subject in the picture is still something I can see any day with my naked eyes... Maybe I should have start at the beginning with IMO but yes I like people that can take amazing pictures without all that extra manipulation that can make or break the deal...
Obviously I can not tell you what camera it was taken with without the metadata or the lens.
I did say what was tampered with of the top of my head in a previous post and a professional photographer agreed that it had been tampered with also. I think tampered is the wrong word, adjusted would be more appropriate.
But what I am getting at is what you think is a natural photo in this day and age may not be.
It's still a nice shot.
Sorry tell a lie.
It was taken with a Nikon D700 and a 24mm 1.4G lens using a Lee filter. Nice gear.
Just had a look at that fellows Flickr account. He takes some lovely photos. He definitely uses some post processing enhancements though.
To me that does not matter. Really nice pics.
To me, the main differences between the images are the first was taken AFTER the sun set, so the light was richer and more diffused, or less harsh and contrasty...depending on you're perspective. I guess I enjoy images where the camera can bring out the mood better than my eye / memory. So longer exposures to demonstrate the movement of light and object. But I'm too lazy to carry around tripods.....
I set my camera up, frame the shot, and press the button - period.
Different strokes for different folks, but for my money I either got the shot or I didn't, and apart from the VERY occasional use of "sharpen" (to make up for the deficiencies in the autofocus between a particular camera and lens combo) I refuse to manipulate the image.
Sure, that camera is seething with electronic algorithms anyway, but it produces what it produces and I stand or fall on the skill of my camera usage, not my expertise in photoshop software. You can take an empty file and actually create a photo with photoshop if you are expert enough, I can't see the point personally. It's like doing a marathon, only in your car - you still get there, but what have you actually achieved?.
Multi exposure composition...what next? Can't anyone take a real photo?
The only enhancements I use is the aperture.
Going more for the scenic shots these days (I Trippadeal a bit) so taking good scenery shots on the fly on an organized tour and trying to get everything in focus with a level horizon without blur is bit of a challenge for me. A change from shooting those action shots of your mates spraying mud at everone in wide aperture, high speed and shallow depth of field.
Couple of good examples here though, like Smiley with the car and dirt road leading to a subject of interest. Nice composition too.
Other than exposure bracketing everything else is cheating because guess what? It never existed. And even then you're hedging your bets...
Going on that theory we had all better go back to this.