Can photo manipulation be considered as art ?

[Alan Klein]

Cam,  Still hard to get too but I got there.  Nice shots. 

[cgarnerhome]

Thanks!

[cgarnerhome]

This may be a little off topic but here it goes.  I am often too quick in accessing images and as a result I often miss the real richness of an image.  For me, knowing the backstory can dramatically influence how a photograph speaks to me.  A couple of examples that come to mind are Walk to Paradise Garden and Tomoko in Bath by Eugene Smith.  After reading the backstory, these images reach me at a much deeper level.  Sometimes I feel like I’m so inundated with imaginary that I don’t take the time to see and feel what’s in front of me.

[RSL]

And THIS ONE Cam, his inmate at a Haitian asylum. It needs words. All three of these are a kind of photojournalism that's high art. The man was a perfectionist, which we all should be but seldom are.

[cgarnerhome]

It's a very thought provoking image.  I happen to have that print!  Photojournalist, it seems, are often underappreciated as artists.  To me, if you only see one image in a series it's the equivalent of reading a chapter in a great novel.

[Rob C]

Real? Fake? Does it matter?

[Peter McLennan]

Doesn't matter.  Nothing does.  The current meme is "Truth Decay"

And it doesn't end with still pix and the cloning tool.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/deepfake-politics-1.4731665

[Rob C]

Doesn't matter.  Nothing does.  The current meme is "Truth Decay"

And it doesn't end with still pix and the cloning tool.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/deepfake-politics-1.4731665

That is a truly worrying development.

I wonder if mankind is actually going to destroy itself courtesy its own inventions?

Rob

[Peter McLennan]

Someone posted recently that Adobe was using AI to forensically identify digital image manipulation. This should work for video, too but it won’t do anything to prevent the spread of doctored imagery in the first place.

It truly is a “No Rules” World.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I love how the article points fingers at Russia, as in "Russia is surely going to use it," as if we wouldn't... against them or, even more likely, domestically.

[LesPalenik]

Speaking of three seconds, I use to set the time length for my digital slide show on the HDTV of vacation pictures to 5 seconds for each "slide".  I used 1 second cross dissolves but that's included in the five seconds.  Two vacation ago, I changed the length to 4 seconds with the same one second cross dissolve.  For my last trip to the southwest national parks, I set it at three seconds.  I find 3 seconds moves the show and people don't get bored (at least I hope so. ). 4 and 5 seconds per shot is too long.   For a few special pictures, I'll set the time to 4 or 5 seconds because they're particularly nice. But otherwise, each of the slides are set for three seconds including the one second cross dissolve. Most photographers, myself included, think too highly of their work. 

This is the problem with standardized slide shows. For some photos, 2 seconds is too long, and for another image I would need 15-30 seconds.
 

[dasuess]

Well, Uelsmann's work is so obviously composite, everyone understands what's going on.  It's when the final image appears perfectly normal but in fact was a composite or some other digital manipulation beyond the boundaries of simple exposure adjustments and cropping that we get into these arguments about photography vs. digital art.

+1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rob C]

Well, Uelsmann's work is so obviously composite, everyone understands what's going on.  It's when the final image appears perfectly normal but in fact was a composite or some other digital manipulation beyond the boundaries of simple exposure adjustments and cropping that we get into these arguments about photography vs. digital art.

And I think that unless it's done for fraud, then so what? Art is one thing, and the declaration of fact another. Either way, film or digital, people have always been able to photograph from an agenda-driven perspective; even when trying their best not to, it comes through via framing, juxtaposition of content. How can anyone avoid being themselves?

[cgarnerhome]

And I think that unless it's done for fraud, then so what? Art is one thing, and the declaration of fact another. Either way, film or digital, people have always been able to photograph from an agenda-driven perspective; even when trying their best not to, it comes through via framing, juxtaposition of content. How can anyone avoid being themselves?

+1

[DougDolde]

The fact is digitally manipulated photographs sell better than their straight version.. Call it what you want I dont care

http://www.douglasdolde.com/-/galleries/joshua-tree-np/-/medias/dd17b825-6e45-47fb-8fd0-5b0741f93b93-electric-cholla

[ripgriffith]

What does it mean when you say the photo communicates?

If I could easily explain why or how an image, or a subject communicates with me, I'd be a writer not a photographer or an artist. What's the old saying..."one picture etc....."?

[Rob C]

The fact is digitally manipulated photographs sell better than their straight version.. Call it what you want I dont care

http://www.douglasdolde.com/-/galleries/joshua-tree-np/-/medias/dd17b825-6e45-47fb-8fd0-5b0741f93b93-electric-cholla

Vincent van G with a computer?

;-)

Rob

[Rayyan]

My answer to the thread title:

Yes. If enough of those people that  ' matter ' consider it so!