'Photoshoppery' today...

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,202
Location
Hawke’s Bay, NZ
It was expedient in my view. Planning ahead.

What I was meaning is they didn’t think ahead to a time where it would be easy to see the deception, and also a time where there is nothing wrong with a lowly ranked person being more important than higher ranking people. The blatant class arrogance that was normal and accepted, that subservience was a norm, and the upper classes were their betters.
We view that very differently now, and probably back then Scott himself would have been more proud of his achievements, as a mere lieutenant. But the upper crusts were not going to let that achievement or example be set by the lower class. So they made him one of them. To make it their class that set the standard. Another upper crust win...
 

Banksie

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2020
Messages
870
Location
Salisbury
...
What I was meaning is they didn’t think ahead to a time where it would be easy to see the deception, and also a time where there is nothing wrong with a lowly ranked person being more important than higher ranking people. The blatant class arrogance that was normal and accepted, that subservience was a norm, and the upper classes were their betters.
We view that very differently now, and probably back then Scott himself would have been more proud of his achievements, as a mere lieutenant. But the upper crusts were not going to let that achievement or example be set by the lower class. So they made him one of them. To make it their class that set the standard. Another upper crust win...
I agree. Though it would have included many reasons. How we were viewed abroad, etc.
On a lighter note, if they had Photoshop, he’d have been standing at the bow of the ship in a raging storm, fighting a kraken, for Britain and the Empire.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,848
Location
Embra
I would say at the capture. You’re processing that image file until the final ‘print’. Image management maybe.
I think it’s an old movie term, but that’s a guess. Or was that post production, I don’t know.

The thing is, that if everything after the press of the shutter button is post-processing then 'point and shoot' and 'straight-out-of-camera' aficionados are post-processing as well. The difference between them and me is that they entrust the post-processing to the camera, while I take charge of it myself. If they get the camera to deliver a JPEG, the camera has to apply all the same sorts of rendering to the RAW data to be able to produce a JPEG for display or printing. So, you need to know or guess what to tell it to use in teh way of white balance, contrast, saturation, sharpening, etc before you press the button, and then hope you got it right. That's the huge advantage of RAW processing - you don't need to guess things like white balance and contrast because you are going to get a look at what you captured and pick your settings after the fact.

I have no problem with post processing if it serves to correct the imbalance of the photo against the true view, as seen by the photographer.

The aim should be to present the view exactly as it was, otherwise the photo is not true reproduction of the subject?

They become more or less an impression, or expression. Not real.

Yep - I agree. I basically take the RAW file and then try to recreate what I saw with my eyes. Of course, I can't remember exactly how it looked by the time I am processing the file, but I know roughly... and I know the camera wouldn't do a better job if I tried to dial it all in, in advance. I maybe do a bit of 'enhancing' of colours, tones, shadows and highlights... to add a bit of drama to a sky... sort of thing... but then, hey-ho... that's what it's all about. 😜

Personally, I like to see photo that shows the subject exactly as it was. That is the point, to remind one of it, or show others a true likeness?

I get art and clever imagery modifications and the skills, technology and interest in doing that, but nothing is more useful in time, than a perfect likeness of that split second.

So, where would you stand with my having removed the red crane in the first image?

And what about black and white photography these days??? In the days of film, the film itself was monochrome, so there was no question about whether you were accurately reproducing what the eye saw. Nowadays, every image starts out as 24 million colours and if you want a black and white rendering of it, you have to throw away the colour data. So, if you do that are you changing the view so it is not exactly what was seen?

Col
 

Fishtales

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
3,897
Location
Central Scotland
I agree with Col. There are no images that aren't processed at some point. My dad spent hours in the darkroom processing black and white negatives to get them to look the best he could. Burn, Dodge, Masking, Cropping and Exposure were all done before a print. Even what we see through our eyes is processed by our brains so we 'see' the best image possible, there isn't a camera that matches that without help.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,848
Location
Embra
I’m guessing that’s your fly-tying as well. Little art-works in themselves.

I haven't got my copy yet, but there should be some of my work in the new January issue of 'Trout & Salmon' mag. It will be the, "What's in Your Box?" feature. If it's Keith Logan's flies, then it's me what done it. 😜

Col
 

Banksie

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2020
Messages
870
Location
Salisbury
I haven't got my copy yet, but there should be some of my work in the new January issue of 'Trout & Salmon' mag. It will be the, "What's in Your Box?" feature. If it's Keith Logan's flies, then it's me what done it. 😜

Col
I’ll go into WH Smiths and have a look over Christmas. Nice one. 😎
 

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,202
Location
Hawke’s Bay, NZ
The thing is, that if everything after the press of the shutter button is post-processing then 'point and shoot' and 'straight-out-of-camera' aficionados are post-processing as well. The difference between them and me is that they entrust the post-processing to the camera, while I take charge of it myself. If they get the camera to deliver a JPEG, the camera has to apply all the same sorts of rendering to the RAW data to be able to produce a JPEG for display or printing. So, you need to know or guess what to tell it to use in teh way of white balance, contrast, saturation, sharpening, etc before you press the button, and then hope you got it right. That's the huge advantage of RAW processing - you don't need to guess things like white balance and contrast because you are going to get a look at what you captured and pick your settings after the fact.



Yep - I agree. I basically take the RAW file and then try to recreate what I saw with my eyes. Of course, I can't remember exactly how it looked by the time I am processing the file, but I know roughly... and I know the camera wouldn't do a better job if I tried to dial it all in, in advance. I maybe do a bit of 'enhancing' of colours, tones, shadows and highlights... to add a bit of drama to a sky... sort of thing... but then, hey-ho... that's what it's all about. 😜



So, where would you stand with my having removed the red crane in the first image?

And what about black and white photography these days??? In the days of film, the film itself was monochrome, so there was no question about whether you were accurately reproducing what the eye saw. Nowadays, every image starts out as 24 million colours and if you want a black and white rendering of it, you have to throw away the colour data. So, if you do that are you changing the view so it is not exactly what was seen?

Col

I think all your photos are great.

My tastes are around the minimum of technology, the maximum of right place, at the right time - interesting subject matter, a true record.

Black and white, is an art form. I like true colour, true images and where that doesn’t deliver a great picture, then figure out why it didn’t come out how the subject actually appeared - and better luck next time.

With digital technology you can create anything you can imagine and whilst fun and very clever it becomes more about art and technology rather than photography?

The honesty of a straight up shot, the perfect record of what was seen, tells the best story.

Taking the crane out has made that photo a forgery 🤣🤣
 

Fishtales

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
3,897
Location
Central Scotland
Taking the crane out has made that photo a forgery 🤣🤣
Does that make the Mona Lisa a fake too :devilish:


Or these 9.

 
Last edited:

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,202
Location
Hawke’s Bay, NZ
Just pretend I took it on a day with identical light, before they put the crane there. 😜
...,I cant un-see the original, unfortunately..

You don't think that the crane makes it more interesting and unique?

What anout a calender of classic views, each with some random but real once in a lifetime oddity in it?

Might sell better than "not stonehenge again"....🙃
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,848
Location
Embra
...,I cant un-see the original, unfortunately..

You don't think that the crane makes it more interesting and unique?

What anout a calender of classic views, each with some random but real once in a lifetime oddity in it?

Might sell better than "not stonehenge again"....🙃

Ah, but what if I had only presented you with the crane-free view? You would never have known it had been 'Shopped'. It's only my honesty that has clued you in on the real view. 😜

I produce a calendar each year for family and friends and sell a few locally to raise funds for the local hospice. I like to think it is Stonehenge-free and that the views are not the ones that appear in other calendars... though most of that is just down to where I happen to be, camera in hand, rather than going out specifically to shoot material for a calendar. ;)

I made a PDF proof of 2021, though one of the months has a Photoshop-induced flaw that I corrected for the final print. I'll see if I can put it in a link. Kudos to anyone who can spot the error.

Col
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,848
Location
Embra
I think this is it...

2021 Calendar

It shows on my monitor with thin white lines across the pages. That might be a compression thing - I did compress the original PDF a lot to make it manageable. Anyway, the white lines are not the error!

Col

PS: I should say in my defence that this year was particularly short on material due to travel restrictions... so it was a case of make-do and mend... 😜
 
Last edited:

Fishtales

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
3,897
Location
Central Scotland
October?

Perhaps November?

One could be natural lens distortion though the other just doesn't look like it should be there.
 
Last edited:
Top