Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Photo of the Day - February 2012

Stuck in suburbia for a while, so I'm back to trawling through the archives...


MeekAndMighty.jpg
 
Just off the green at Chambers Bay Golf. After the shot someone came buy looking for another lost one. They are still considered in play.


EXIF Summary: 1/1000s f/4.0 ISO100 Tamron 28-75 f/2.8@75mm

Dale
 
fitshaced said:
Very nice. How much post processing did you do for this?
Click to expand...

Thanks, fitshaced. Pretty much zilch as far as special post-processing goes. I always have to do some basic processing since I shoot raw and in UniWB (so photos all look like green duotones straight out of the camera); manually editing white balance, curves, vibrancy, dodging, and burning are all de rigueur for me. This photo didn't need much in the way of tweaking, however. I used a graduated ND and a CPL in addition to make the sky more punchy and to tame the glaring whites on the church. I always add a subtle amount of manual vignetting to my photos too. That's about it.
 
Oberhammer said:
I like this photo. Too bad some people have to vote down HDR artistic photos. Keep up the good work and ignore the unhappy few that are jealous. :D
Click to expand...

Thanks. Glad someone likes it.

I just wish that instead of voting images down that people would give constructive feedback. If someone doesn't like it then it would be useful to know why.
 
Doylem said:
I’m not a ‘purist’ about photography (through I wouldn’t be upset if I never saw another cartoon-like HDR shot :(). I just like to know that what I’m looking at is - substantially - real. And when I see a heavily manipulated pic like this, I no longer believe that this event happened/these people ever existed/this landscape was actually there. Once photography loses this aspect of “there-ness”, it loses 90% of its meaning too... including the trust of the viewer in what he’s seeing. The image becomes all surface and no depth: stripped of the ‘validity’ of a documentary photograph, yet without the emotional charge that a painting might provide. That is... the worst of both worlds: neither true, nor interpretive... just technique. The effect is to make all the pictures look pretty much the same...

Just my opinion (and worth as much as you paid for it)...
Click to expand...

What a bunch of BS!

I like my photos and I think they look nice. I think what you wrote is a bunch of crap. At least, now, I know who votes down my photos all the time.

You write your comments as though they are the facts. Kind of humorous when you think about it.

I manipulate my photos on purpose because I am creative. Sometimes I get interesting results and sometimes I do not. I try to make photos interesting and unique. I do it for myself and not for you. I post the photos here for others to enjoy. If you don't like them, don't look at them.

I follow the forum rules. So, there is no need for you to criticize and ridicule (and constantly vote down) my photos. There is room in this forum for all types of photos, not just the ones you think are "photos" and that fall neatly in to your self-described dogma.

I suspect most people these days manipulate their photos since we live in the digital age. The question is to what degree. There is no such thing as a "purist."

Just my opinion (and worth as much as you paid for it)... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back