Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: Are hunter a good cook ?

  1. #1

    Default Are hunter a good cook ?

    Well there exist a debate whether you are a photographer or a graphic designer who photoshop photos . As HCB said, good hunter aren't good cook , but currently, when i browse around on flickr and many websites, i asked, has digital bought us to the generation of hunter and cook where HDR image more attractive, heavy crop and post processing , but it become like a wide spread trend rather than certain fews individuals .

    So i want to ask

    - To what extend you should cook your photograph ?

    - Will the easy of cook affect your attitude toward photography since you can fix many things after taken the shot, and can take many shot, thus didn't put that much effort into the shots ? Or is it just me ?

    - Why people cook their photo until CG image that somehow lost the soul ? Does highly saturated colour , super sharp really that much matter ? I do understand that it is a matter of taste, but does photography moving somewhere new , with this trend as a signal ? The era of surreal image where photographer freely manipulate image ?

    - The main question is the attitude between the hunter and cook ? How will it affect if you cook more.

    Please keep the discussion friendly , and don't use example that go to extreme level , talking about average here .

  2. #2

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    discussed to death, don't think it's anything new, btw

    ...if you think that unaltered images are the way to go, then you can do it yourself; my view on photography has always been that every photograph requires a certain degree of cooking. some need less, some need more, but all need cooking to a small extent - why? because your digital sensor doesn't give you the results that you want, the VISION that you want. if you blindly accept the vision of a machine which is even less simple than a pentium (probably, i don't know what sort of processors they use, the issue here is that it is a MACHINE, not YOU).. since that is what you are getting when you post up straight-out-of-camera photographs. despite the fact that you can proudly announce that "not post processed". i think most people who post that up are being redundant, and such statements should only be used for TEST COMPARISONS. how often is it that you think the same as a simplistic machine, i.e. your camera?

    how much processing is enough? no one can tell you, only you know; whether your vision is accurate and acceptable by others is another thing altogether. since no photographer can truly only shoot for himself, then it is up to the photographer to learn with experience and his own thinking how to develop his style and vision.

    some photographs, i do 1 or 2 steps , levels and contrast and slight sharpening and that is it. some, i can spend 1 or 2 hours doing it - the difference is how close the photograph is to my vision compared to what the camera is given me. but i have maybe accepted its vision once or twice out of 17K+ shutter counts.

    there is a thin fine line that is so very easy to overstep between just enough and too much, there is also a thin fine line between not enough and just enough - everyday we try to seek it more clearly; there are individuals who like to stray from it further.

    i am not even sure why you have included hdr in your list of things to detest, it seems. you can paint it nicely with cordial words but there is resentment and a very clear viewpoint expressed here. hdr is not to blame, the technique is limited as of today, yes, but it can be harnessed to produce perfectly fine looking photographs that look like what the eyes see. we have many fine examples. there is also abuse of it.

    i also question what you mean by "effort in shoot". are you saying that EFFORT = RESULTS? then my dear sir, you are sorely sorely wrong. most weathered photographers i speak to learn this lesson quickly in photography - that the quality of your results , unfortunately, has NO RELATION with results; though obviously with more understanding of light one would get better results.

    let me tell you of my own experience; i once struggled to climb a very steep slope, in the hopes that there would be a good view, a higher viewpoint that would make the scene look better, differentiate the levels. it took me a long time, i nearly slipped once, and in the end what did i get? a huge bush had grown out of the side of the part in the direction i wanted. if i wanted the view i visualise i would have to include it, and it spoilt what i wanted. i got nothing out of my effort.

    but do i regret climbing it? no. if you let me do it all over again, give me another cliff where such a possibility might happen, i would do it. and i might not get any results, and that is the lesson to learn. in photography, you can work very hard to get a shot, the shot might come out like rubbish. you can work very lightly to get a shot, the shot might come out good. so please do not equate results with effort. if you want me to rant more about what i have learnt about effort and results and life from photography, i can continue and make a 1000 word essay.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    on another note, you may name some of your favourite photographers; i have many, and all of them process their images somewhat.

    and if you bring up the film argument; let it be known that photoshop was based on what you could do in the darkroom (even cloning, i'm told).. which is why it is the DIGITAL DARKROOM, cheers.

    also, a good photograph at the end of the day, is a good photograph because of many factors, among which include:

    1) composition
    2) exposure
    3) post processing

    and perhaps more less measurable/quantifiable/judgeable traits like mood, emotions evoked. you only mention one, and you speak of it as if it can overcome 1 and 2. it had never been able to do so, is not able to do so, and will not be able to do so in the near future. if 3 is overdone, then the photograph is spoilt. so why worry about it?
    Last edited by night86mare; 16th April 2008 at 11:42 PM.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    I do expect that you will be the one answer quickly, and also the one i hope not answer nightmare Due to some reason u like to throw a wall of words with little sense and you tend to generalise everything from your experience with i doubt the relevence. But then, how about we focus on the attitude of the cook and the hunter ? For you are someone who is so expert in HDR, do you focus on your post process more , or the idea of the photos when you take it ? Or rant ?

  5. #5

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    And please don't replace one on another but rather one more than the other , people tend to stand infront of water shoot 3 frames long exposure in labadour park and go home HDR them , rather than trying to make something new , interesting out of it ? Do you think so ? And please again, focus on the attitue ? I mean the attitue of the photographers of course, not urs

  6. #6

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by bahibo View Post
    I do expect that you will be the one answer quickly, and also the one i hope not answer nightmare Due to some reason u like to throw a wall of words with little sense and you tend to generalise everything from your experience with i doubt the relevence. But then, how about we focus on the attitude of the cook and the hunter ? For you are someone who is so expert in HDR, do you focus on your post process more , or the idea of the photos when you take it ? Or rant ?
    wonderful, you have met the numerous points i have thrown back to you with

    "i hope you would not reply"

    ...do you want me to point out that amazingly, and ironically, i do have the feeling that your apad photos are immensely overcooked? there is massive oversharpening done, and the shadow/highlight portion, is extremely overdone to the point of massive haloing.

    i focus on the COMPOSITION, and i focus on what i want to do to the photograph. if you claim that you only do one of two, then you have a limited understanding of photography as a whole.
    Last edited by night86mare; 16th April 2008 at 11:47 PM.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Nah, don't mean that. I didnt said i am a cook or a hunter yet also, or no good in both of them. Don't attack me , i know my skill not up to standard, that why ask around and learn .

    But what i'm asking is not about you or me , you see, can we talk about photographers as a whole and not me and you , since i'm not qualified as one yet.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    東京 Tokyo
    Posts
    10,193

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    the analogy of hunter vs. cook is valid probably in the field of photography that requires very precise technical performance, where the hunter is definitely more preferred than the cook. otherwise, hunter or cook, it's the vision that counts, on top of aesthetics. beautiful images, even technically beautiful ones, are one too many in this age.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by bahibo View Post
    Nah, don't mean that. I didnt said i am a cook or a hunter yet also, or no good in both of them. Don't attack me , i know my skill not up to standard, that why ask around and learn .

    But what i'm asking is not about you or me , you see, can we talk about photographers as a whole and not me and you , since i'm not qualified as one yet.
    what is this

    you take a larger look around you will know that there are true photographers, i do not consider myself as one.

    btw, if you have any problems with my labrador park photos, please let me know how to improve. i have always, always, always expressed the belief that anyone, whether accomplished as a photographer or not - has the right to comment on photographs so long as the comments are constructive.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by eikin View Post
    the analogy of hunter vs. cook is valid probably in the field of photography that requires very precise technical performance, where the hunter is definitely more preferred than the cook. otherwise, hunter or cook, it's the vision that counts, on top of aesthetics. beautiful images, even technically beautiful ones, are one too many in this age.
    I see, you have a good point . But i do wonder are people moving toward a cook ? And what effect is it on the attitude ?

  11. #11

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by eikin View Post
    the analogy of hunter vs. cook is valid probably in the field of photography that requires very precise technical performance, where the hunter is definitely more preferred than the cook. otherwise, hunter or cook, it's the vision that counts, on top of aesthetics. beautiful images, even technically beautiful ones, are one too many in this age.
    i could not agree more; photojournalism perhaps comes to mind, where preference is for as little alteration as possible for realistic reportage.

    i would say that in some ways, the cook role becomes quite more important in landscape photography, for example.

    you cannot tar photography over with some large monkey god brush; saying that there is a measurable "extent" to which processing can be measured is somewhat myopic. i have seen extensively processed photographs that work; i have also seen what look like extremely unprocessed photographs to work. so how?

  12. #12

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    what is this

    you take a larger look around you will know that there are true photographers, i do not consider myself as one.

    btw, if you have any problems with my labrador park photos, please let me know how to improve. i have always, always, always expressed the belief that anyone, whether accomplished as a photographer or not - has the right to comment on photographs so long as the comments are constructive.
    Honestly nightmare , i dont even know you got shot at labrador park , appologize if i offended you. I know that there are true photographers but hope they will join the discussion.
    Your comment is welcome of course. It's just that your attitude in discussion that mostly make few discussion close down that make me worry to discuss w you.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by bahibo View Post
    Honestly nightmare , i dont even know you got shot at labrador park , appologize if i offended you. I know that there are true photographers but hope they will join the discussion.
    Your comment is welcome of course. It's just that your attitude in discussion that mostly make few discussion close down that make me worry to discuss w you.
    orly, what a coincidence then.

    so what have you discussed here?

    other than saying "it seems like more and more people are processing their photographs" (and somehow, shooting yourself in the leg).. you have not shown any reasonable interest at discussion.

    bring up some of your own viewpoints, instead of random musings, we can never engage in any semblance of discussion if one party says, "oh, let's discuss this"; the other presents his points, and he says "oh, good point, let's discuss this further". i would listen, trust me, and counter in return, if i so choose to disagree.

    otherwise, if there is no other point, then this discussion has been overcooked more than photographs are overcooked today in the past.. especially here.. and i would report this thread and ask for closing.
    Last edited by night86mare; 16th April 2008 at 11:58 PM.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    東京 Tokyo
    Posts
    10,193

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by bahibo View Post
    I see, you have a good point . But i do wonder are people moving toward a cook ? And what effect is it on the attitude ?
    you can look at it this way. technology has given the power to control into the hands of the average photographer who would have otherwise just send his entire roll of negatives to some lab and pray for some good results. we ought to be celebrating this liberation of control over one's images in photography work. and as technology moves forward, it will come a day when digital prints can not only match high quality traditional prints, but surpass them in an affordable way for the average consumer as well.

    you may assume that many ''photographers'' are just trying to take an easy way out with modern technology, but without modern technology many people would not even come this near to become a ''photographer,'' whichever level one assigns oneself. there's no need to impose a certain attitude on this ever expanding group of people, if one is serious about the work one does, one will find the most appropriate method and attitude naturally.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    there's no right or wrong in appreciating arts.
    and of coz there's no right or wrong to process or not process your photos.

    However, i do sense that you are trying to propagate something and u are biased against differing opinions.
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  16. #16

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Well, the point is, whether that since cooking is easier, will people spend more time to cook rather spend more time to think before pressing the shutter release.


    And you see , i dont know the answer, so i'm asking. You can report if you want, it's fine if mod close it if it's bring no good.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by bahibo View Post
    Well, the point is, whether that since cooking is easier, will people spend more time to cook rather spend more time to think before pressing the shutter release.


    And you see , i dont know the answer, so i'm asking. You can report if you want, it's fine if mod close it if it's bring no good.
    who knows the answer?

    i don't know. how many people here have tried film darkroom work? not me. i have nothing to compare it against, i wager that 80% of the people here not either.. we will never know unless the camera companies stop producing dslrs

    in which case they sure will kena lynched

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    東京 Tokyo
    Posts
    10,193

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    maybe we should ask ourselves if we would brand masters of darkroom as ''cooks'' as well, as oppose to ''hunters.''

  19. #19

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by eikin View Post
    you can look at it this way. technology has given the power to control into the hands of the average photographer who would have otherwise just send his entire roll of negatives to some lab and pray for some good results. we ought to be celebrating this liberation of control over one's images in photography work. and as technology moves forward, it will come a day when digital prints can not only match high quality traditional prints, but surpass them in an affordable way for the average consumer as well.

    you may assume that many ''photographers'' are just trying to take an easy way out with modern technology, but without modern technology many people would not even come this near to become a ''photographer,'' whichever level one assigns oneself. there's no need to impose a certain attitude on this ever expanding group of people, if one is serious about the work one does, one will find the most appropriate method and attitude naturally.
    You did answer my question in a few senses, thanks. To add an idea just come out of my mind i think It's vary among individual, and since photography is a very individual,subjective art form. I may be wrong thinking it's a trend but i still wonder does the "easy" spoil the people.

    To Sin, no bias, honestly, i just a bit argue w nightmare since he talk about me instead of photographers out there, you see, i'm not qualified as an example

  20. #20

    Default Re: Are hunter a good cook ?

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    who knows the answer?

    i don't know. how many people here have tried film darkroom work? not me. i have nothing to compare it against, i wager that 80% of the people here not either.. we will never know unless the camera companies stop producing dslrs

    in which case they sure will kena lynched
    Since when it become the discuss between film and digital, darkroom and photoshop.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •