Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Photographing the Icons  (Read 10159 times)

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4559
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #20 on: August 22, 2013, 06:24:25 pm »

With all due respect, that's about the most fake looking photo I have seen in a long time (and on LuLa, that's saying a lot). It looks like a cheap watercolor. Nature never - NEVER - looked like that.

But, you can probably sell hundreds.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #21 on: August 22, 2013, 06:28:39 pm »

Ouch!

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2013, 06:30:39 pm »

Peter, nature may never have looked like that in North Carolina, but I've seen the Grand Tetons look a lot like that in that kind of light.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Tonysx

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 96
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2013, 08:13:53 pm »

I don't pretend to know what Isaac's point is, but I find the colors here a bit insipid myself. Interestingly, the reflection has fairly nice colors. Some sort of polarization something something?The intent here, I assume, is to show us the delicate pastel tones? They're just a little too delicate for my taste..
I have to agree with amolitor. Isaac stating "I don't like the colours" is a bit confusing. Who knows what anyone else sees on their monitor? On my monitor the scene looks unrealistic. No contrast, too bright and the pastels too harsh. The actual view is very worth while.
Logged
‘Be you ever so high, the law

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #24 on: August 23, 2013, 04:16:01 am »

Quote Tonysx.

On my monitor the scene looks unrealistic. No contrast, too bright and the pastels too harsh. The actual view is very worth while.

Unquote

I think the statement sums it up. Another poster states it is what you choose to present is what matters. What it looked like in reality is what Dave saw and tried to represent but it doesn't look "realistic". Isaac has been a bit ham fisted in what he stated but I can see where he is coming from in this instance. Whether he chooses to be provocative in his postings or if it is his nature I don't know.

kencameron

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
    • Recent Photographs
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #25 on: August 23, 2013, 07:22:24 am »

...but I find the colors here a bit insipid myself. Interestingly, the reflection has fairly nice colors.
+1, and nice observation about the reflection. With the usual provisos about monitors, profiles, color spaces, JPGs, subjective reactions,etc. I have no idea whether what I am looking at looks anything like what Dave looks at on his monitor. But "a bit insipid" works for what I am looking at, and I find myself wishing for a different treatment.

Isaac's point I (perhaps presumptuously) take to be that the digital photographer chooses how the colors will look in the image he produces, having available software that can change them in all sorts of ways. Making them look like his recollection of the scene he photographed was Dave's approach, but I am not sure whether that guarantees that they will look pleasing, as nature is capable of looking insipid. Or is it?
Logged
Ken Cameron

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2515
  • I've even written a book about it
    • SkyePhotoGuide.com
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #26 on: August 23, 2013, 07:55:20 am »

With all due respect, that's about the most fake looking photo I have seen in a long time (and on LuLa, that's saying a lot). It looks like a cheap watercolor. Nature never - NEVER - looked like that.

But, you can probably sell hundreds.

Thank you Peter, that is quite an accolade you have bestowed upon me there and is something I know I will cherish for many years to come. :D

So I think what this is all boiling down to is, whether you/we/I as photographers like the colours within an image, without regard for the reality of the colours within the scene, even if they might be as near to the actual colours at the time of capture and under those particular lighting conditions?

I don't hold this image up as any great piece of art or will ever try to print it or sell it (not much call for shots of the Grand Tetons up here on Skye you know  ;D), I only held it up as a representation of an over photographed iconic location, but I do find it odd that capturing the reality of the scene is apparently no longer seen as preferable to shifting the colours around later on the PC, because we can and it so easy to do so, to the point where it has become the norm and we always feel that we should - have we really gone this far into this digital age, that reality is no longer good enough and only some kind of super reality will suffice?  -  No need to answer that, I already know the answer and am also just as guilty of doing this because, well, I can.  ;)

There are colour anomalies in this image I agree and Andrew points out something I also found odd, that the reflection colours and contrast are so much different from the non reflection - but why this is so I do not know, some kind of natural polarising effect from within the water I imagine, but who knows? All I really know is that I am good enough with PS not to randomly introduce such anomalies into this image for no good reason and indeed, why would I ever want to.

I am enjoying this by the way and finding this very interesting, but as always, I am more than willing to do all I can to try and please you the viewer, so if the sight of this image offend thee, then say as much below and I will pluck it out from the forum and cast it from thee  ;D

Dave
« Last Edit: August 23, 2013, 08:36:14 am by Dave (Isle of Skye) »
Logged

Iluvmycam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 533
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #27 on: August 23, 2013, 07:56:23 am »

Looks like a painting!
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #28 on: August 23, 2013, 10:13:03 am »

... - have we really gone this far into this digital age, that reality is no longer good enough ...

Reality is overrated, my friend ;)

Reality can be, and often is, bland, insipid, boring... Isn't that the very reason we get up at ungodly hours, freeze or sweat waiting, fight insects or reptiles, drive hundreds of miles, etc., just to catch that rare fleeting moment when it is not?

Photographing the icons, as you rightly titled it, carries an additional risk. The risk of being compared to the numerous attempts before you who were luckier in catching that fleeting moment.

Sometimes, nature's moments are so spectacular that any snapshot would do it justice. That's when "reality is good enough." And sometimes, certain places, the icons in particular, are grand by themselves, no matter time of day, season or lighting. Grand Teton is grand for a reason.

Then there is that whole issue of fine art landscape photography vs. documentary. Interpreting vs. recording. Recreating not just what we saw, but how we felt. Even how we wanted to see it.

Having said the above, I personally do not find your OP photograph too objectionable. I was there too and left with a much more mundane, mid-day record (the perils of family and friends travel). In other words, I consider you way luckier than I was, getting the light and color that you did.

It is a fine personal memento. Printed big, I am sure it would "speak" differently than a postage-stamp jpeg. I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing it on my wall. As I am sure many Brits who visited it (or dream doing so) wouldn't mind either. And Americans, for that matter.

Speaking about water reflection... it is simple: reflections are always darker. If you (and others) find it more pleasing than the reflecting object itself, it simply means that the whole image is (slightly) overexposed. Bring it down a third or half a stop and you'll have a winner.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #29 on: August 23, 2013, 10:17:44 am »

Looks like a painting!

Comments like this (and I get them often too) leave me wondering what exactly that phrase means. A compliment? Criticism? What exactly makes it "like a painting"? When photography mimics paintings, is it good or bad (for photography)?

amolitor

  • Guest
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #30 on: August 23, 2013, 10:21:03 am »

Depends on your attitude toward Pictorialism!
Logged

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #31 on: August 23, 2013, 12:59:36 pm »

So what we've all learned from this educational thread is that there are some colors that Isaac doesn't like.

And some colour combinations.

And that kind of basic preference is enough to overwhelm whatever other qualities a photograph may present.

And apparently some people think that colour is a property of a scene rather than a subjective experience locked inside our skulls.

And apparently the point of landscape photography is to record a scene ;-)


Who knows what anyone else sees on their monitor?

Well at least the monitor is calibrated, and the viewing conditions darkened, and I looked at the image with several different programs.


What it looked like in reality is what Dave saw and tried to represent but it doesn't look "realistic".

I haven't said - but it doesn't look "realistic" - so maybe that's your opinion.


the digital photographer chooses how the colors will look in the image he produces

Of course.


... but I do find it odd that capturing the reality of the scene is apparently no longer seen as preferable to shifting the colours around later on the PC...

Previously you wrote "If the colour is jarring or not what I want, then I try black and white."

Doesn't that involve "shifting the colours around later on the PC" -- making the blues lighter in the mix and darkening reds, ...?
« Last Edit: August 23, 2013, 01:14:30 pm by Isaac »
Logged

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2515
  • I've even written a book about it
    • SkyePhotoGuide.com
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #32 on: August 23, 2013, 06:17:23 pm »

Previously you wrote "If the colour is jarring or not what I want, then I try black and white."

Doesn't that involve "shifting the colours around later on the PC" -- making the blues lighter in the mix and darkening reds, ...?

Well to be honest, no. I just don't do B/W like that, I use various methods, but mostly I use blended and overlaid greyscale calculation layers for each of the RGB channels, which I may have also pushed the colours apart prior to beginning, with the Dan Margulis inspired Man from Mars curve, which can help to separate the tonalities and increase apparent contrast in each channel, but this doesn't move the colours around independently, it just pushes them apart from each other.

I am not actively trying to disagree with everything you say Isaac, honestly I am not, it is just that I don't seem to do any of what you are suggesting that I do, so far at least.  ;)

So anyway, back to the worst picture that has ever been posted on Lula in the history of the forum - if the colours are jarring (as I said previously and as Isaac has so kindly reminded me of), then I try black and white, so here's a mono version of the original image, produced through the application of a gradient map and also a mid tone contrast boost via the unsharp mask - and also a much larger version.

Dave
« Last Edit: August 23, 2013, 06:31:03 pm by Dave (Isle of Skye) »
Logged

seamus finn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1243
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #33 on: August 23, 2013, 08:17:49 pm »

Here's what could have happened with the picture: pure fiction of course and with due respect to all concerned -a bit of verbal fun for a change:



His finger hovering over the button ready to trip the shutter, Dave glanced up seeking last-minute divine intervention

‘Where else on earth would you want to be at this moment?’, he asked himself, noting the pink-fringed clouds.  
                                                                                                                                                                                              
Well, he could have stood in bed  but no - after all, this was a magical, mysterious location, where anything could happen and often did if you were lucky enough to be there at the time. And Dave was often in places like this - fair dues.

Then he noticed a mysterious pendulum dangling invitingly over his head. It emitted a strange, blue, light and it swung back and forth in the breeze, enticingly touching his wool cap as it passed. There was a faint, glittering legend inscribed on its face which read: creative cloud.

Dave was puzzled. This artefact definitely hadn’t been there when he’d so carefully set up his tripod in the early hours, when he’d examined every element of the scene, above, below and beyond; when he’d clinically anticipated every artistic potential, and when he’d waited so patiently for the right light. He would have noticed something like that.

And now this aberration!

‘Creative cloud my arse!’ he muttered, adjusting an f-stop. ‘This is a catastrophe, this is worse than a human person walking into a landscape.’

Dave did his best to ignore the apparition, but he couldn’t. Eventually, he slowly reached up and gently tugged on the chord, thinking that the bizarre hallucination was due to his lack of sleep and that it would soon disappear.  He was wrong.

Every time he chucked on the chord, the colour in the landscape changed and became dramatically more spectacular and lighter in tone - just the way he'd wanted it in the first place. Now, all he had to do was imagine the perfect picture and, hey presto, it appeared.

‘Oh my God, Reichmann and Schewe are dead in the water. I have seen the future’, he stammered, arms outstretched to the sky. ‘It’s up there - it’s in the clouds.’

Every time he pulled the chord, a more arresting image appeared. He couldn’t decide. He twiddled with the chord. He found a small knob. He pressed it. The previous image came up. He pressed again. A better one emerged. He went back and forth, unable to choose.

Then a rare light began to spread on the landscape - a possible masterpiece, in Fred’s humble opinion, but still he hesitated. Too many choices, and too many know-it-alls  on a place called LuLa  where he submitted work for appraisal. To him, the term LuLa conjured up an image of an open-air lunatic asylum, but he kept that to himself. No point in making more enemies than he had already.

Privately, he regarded its denizens with loathing (he wasn't alone in that) - a gallery of sneering loudmouth misfits, making excoriating comments just to show how clever they were with a keyboard and a limited vocabulary.  Many of them never took a decent picture in their miserable lives and if asked, would say that depth of field was an important element of agriculture. Some of them were retired from godforsaken jobs and never got out of bed. At least that was his private opinion, but he didn't share it with anybody, certainly not on LuLa itself. After all, does a turkey vote for Christmas?

As for Isaac - a class of his own.

Fred’s  finger hovered over the button. He couldn’t decide - so many choices, so many critics to please, Isaac lurking, what to do? The more he delayed, the more Isaac preyed on his mind.

Suddenly, a deep voice reverberated around the whole landscape, the tripod tilted and fell to the ground, the very earth shivered, thunder rolled in the distant hills and lightening streaked the heavens.  A mighty voice commanded:

‘TAKE THE FUCKING SHOT.'

So Dave did what he was told and experienced great joy.

‘I have a keeper - I’m confident’, he proclaimed to the valley in a sudden rush of contentment to the head. He was at peace with himself and the wider world and as far as LuLa was concerned - two fingers.

'They can't take this from me', he whispered, fists clenched. 'It's inspired.'


Wisely, he didn't look to the clouds or try to engage the mysterious force that had made him into a great photographer and a prophet. He simply folded his tripod and set his face towards home, but as he progressed, a thought slowly began to gnaw at his mind and eventually it crystallised into a single dread:  

‘I saw the future up at the lake, I saw the end of the world as we know it, I am part of the new order, I took a great image on the word of a god, but no matter, I feel in my bones that those bastards on LuLa will start knit-picking and pointing the finger. Where am I going wrong? Especially with Isaac!'

In his new wisdom, he found no answer to that.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2013, 09:50:34 pm by seamus finn »
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #34 on: August 23, 2013, 08:58:35 pm »

Brilliant, Seamus!   
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

mezzoduomo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #35 on: August 23, 2013, 09:04:25 pm »

Brilliant, Seamus!   


Indeed. Nicely done, Seamus.
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #36 on: August 23, 2013, 09:26:52 pm »

Wonderful, Seamus. You nailed it! Several of us are crawling out from under the wreckage, and Isaac's still back there, mumbling.

Why aren't you writing fiction?
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

seamus finn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1243
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #37 on: August 23, 2013, 09:54:39 pm »

Thanks guys,

You might want to re-read it. I was re-writing it live on LuLa in the modify box while you were posting.  An old time hack up against a deadline, so to speak. Please read it again!
Logged

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4690
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #38 on: August 23, 2013, 10:05:17 pm »

Superb, seamus.  We're whacked by clever prose.


Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Photographing the Icons
« Reply #39 on: August 23, 2013, 10:14:15 pm »

Best post on Lula in a long while Seamus.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up