One of the debates that rages, at least in certain circles, is what constitutes a great (or even an above-average) photographer, given the technology that predominates in our society. There are so many ways of doctoring, re-touching, and enhancing your images post-shooting that were not available to photographers of former years. Some of these techniques are able to faithfully represent the image before the photographer's eye and convey that to the viewer, and those, in my humble opinion, are the procedures worth keeping and using. Something like high dynamic range (HDR) composites. They have the potential to produce additional detail and help create a scene more like our eyes would see it (unless you go for the bad-acid-trip-HDR sort of images), and I have no doubt that Ansel or Galen, were they alive today, would be lining up to put HDR to use to create even more eye-dropping, envy-inspiring photographs.
However, there are a number of techniques that are no more than gimmicks, and this recent post on gizmodo (thanks to Deva at Perhaps Picture Perfect for the link) highlights those very well. The black-and-white-with-a-spot-of-color, the fades in the corners, the bad cropping and collage-ing/merging, all are on display to show what you should not do. Prepare to grimmace, and maybe even run away in horror. One of my favorites?
I almost cringe to post this shot on this blog, but it is too hilarious to let go unmentioned. The color spotting on the dress, makes it look like she wet herself red, or was shot in the belly. It adds absolutely nothing, in fact only detracting from the otherwise pleasant (though bland) black and white portrait.
The parent site that prompted the gizmodo post is entitled You Are Not a Photographer, and is a pretty funny site with snarky comments. I think the title "fauxtog" should be more widely circulated. Wow.
No comments:
Post a Comment