Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...


Or buy a set of oil paints and paint nature the way you think it should
look.


My worthless opinion?

I liked it. Obviously it's not natural looking, but I am not of the opinion
that every photograph need be. Images processed like this are more
representative of an art form or interpretation as opposed to a well
composed but otherwise faithful image capture of a landmark or landscape.
The visual effect in a picture like this is appealing.

This opinion is offered as is. No claims of knowledge or photographic
competence or qualifications to judge contemporary art form is implied with
this opinion. This opinion may be withdrawn without notice in the interests
of forming a different opinion. Or not caring anymore.
Consider this opinion only under the direct supervision of your mental
health doctor or therapist.
No warranty, expressed or implied applies to this opinion.

Eisboch




Eisboch,
Thanks for the comment, and I too disagree with Harry about a photograph
should be limited to "You are there" or "Postcard" record of a scenic
view. If I limited myself to this kind of photography, I would get
bored very quickly. The best photos I have seen have been manipulated
in some fashion, either by perspective, a very unique angle, shutter
speed (to enrich the colors or blur all or part of the photo, using the
aperture to change the depth of field, deliberately blurring part or all
of the scene (by moving the camera or zooming the lens while using a
slow shutter speed, HDR or other post processing techniques. That was
the reason I found SWS comments so interesting and helpful. He didn't
disagree with my concept, but my execution of the concept. Since I am
really a novice at all of this, I am very interested in ideas that will
help me move along in my skills. I do have a problem with over sharping
images, and that was my first attempt at using Photomatrix to develop an
HDR photo. I play on redoing this photo using SWS suggestions. I
actually processed this HDR from one photo shot in RAW, and adjusted the
exposure and brightness in post processing, saving the photo in PSD and
then combining them using Photomatrix.

The fact that I disagree with Harry's opinion of photography, does not
mean I didn't appreciate it. I did ask for his opinion, partly because
I knew Harry would have a definite opinion and would not pull any
punches. I also hoped his response would generate more comments. He is
not alone in thinking photography should be limited to the "You are
there" style. While I know I am a novice, I also know there are many
people who don't like Picasso and Pollock, so if I ask for comments I
have to expect many will not like my work.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Eisboch,
Thanks for the comment, and I too disagree with Harry about a photograph
should be limited to "You are there" or "Postcard" record of a scenic
view. If I limited myself to this kind of photography, I would get
bored very quickly. The best photos I have seen have been manipulated
in some fashion, either by perspective, a very unique angle, shutter
speed (to enrich the colors or blur all or part of the photo, using the
aperture to change the depth of field, deliberately blurring part or all
of the scene (by moving the camera or zooming the lens while using a
slow shutter speed, HDR or other post processing techniques.


You "misunderstood" my comment. I often change perspective, angle,
shutter speed or aperture myself, but when I do, I am still looking for
a photo found in nature.

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Eisboch,
Thanks for the comment, and I too disagree with Harry about a photograph
should be limited to "You are there" or "Postcard" record of a scenic
view. If I limited myself to this kind of photography, I would get
bored very quickly. The best photos I have seen have been
manipulated in some fashion, either by perspective, a very unique
angle, shutter speed (to enrich the colors or blur all or part of the
photo, using the aperture to change the depth of field, deliberately
blurring part or all of the scene (by moving the camera or zooming the
lens while using a slow shutter speed, HDR or other post processing
techniques.


You "misunderstood" my comment. I often change perspective, angle,
shutter speed or aperture myself, but when I do, I am still looking for
a photo found in nature.

Thanks for the clarification, and you were correct, my photo was
definitely not what one would see in the real world.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:



You "misunderstood" my comment. I often change perspective, angle,
shutter speed or aperture myself, but when I do, I am still looking
for a photo found in nature.

Thanks for the clarification, and you were correct, my photo was
definitely not what one would see in the real world.

PS - I also take some photos that are found in natu

http://community.webshots.com/album/561702755BFhzVR

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...


Or buy a set of oil paints and paint nature the way you think it should
look.


My worthless opinion?

I liked it. Obviously it's not natural looking, but I am not of the
opinion that every photograph need be. Images processed like this are
more representative of an art form or interpretation as opposed to a well
composed but otherwise faithful image capture of a landmark or landscape.
The visual effect in a picture like this is appealing.

This opinion is offered as is. No claims of knowledge or photographic
competence or qualifications to judge contemporary art form is implied
with this opinion. This opinion may be withdrawn without notice in the
interests of forming a different opinion. Or not caring anymore.
Consider this opinion only under the direct supervision of your mental
health doctor or therapist.
No warranty, expressed or implied applies to this opinion.

Eisboch


Eisboch,
Thanks for the comment, and I too disagree with Harry about a photograph
should be limited to "You are there" or "Postcard" record of a scenic
view. If I limited myself to this kind of photography, I would get bored
very quickly. The best photos I have seen have been manipulated in some
fashion, either by perspective, a very unique angle, shutter speed (to
enrich the colors or blur all or part of the photo, using the aperture to
change the depth of field, deliberately blurring part or all of the scene
(by moving the camera or zooming the lens while using a slow shutter
speed, HDR or other post processing techniques. That was the reason I
found SWS comments so interesting and helpful. He didn't disagree with my
concept, but my execution of the concept. Since I am really a novice at
all of this, I am very interested in ideas that will help me move along in
my skills. I do have a problem with over sharping images, and that was my
first attempt at using Photomatrix to develop an HDR photo. I play on
redoing this photo using SWS suggestions. I actually processed this HDR
from one photo shot in RAW, and adjusted the exposure and brightness in
post processing, saving the photo in PSD and then combining them using
Photomatrix.

The fact that I disagree with Harry's opinion of photography, does not
mean I didn't appreciate it. I did ask for his opinion, partly because I
knew Harry would have a definite opinion and would not pull any punches. I
also hoped his response would generate more comments. He is not alone in
thinking photography should be limited to the "You are there" style. While
I know I am a novice, I also know there are many people who don't like
Picasso and Pollock, so if I ask for comments I have to expect many will
not like my work.

A wise old sage once said, "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder".

Eisboch,
Thanks for the comment, and I too disagree with Harry about a photograph
should be limited to "You are there" or "Postcard" record of a scenic
view. If I limited myself to this kind of photography, I would get bored
very quickly. The best photos I have seen have been manipulated in some
fashion, either by perspective, a very unique angle, shutter speed (to
enrich the colors or blur all or part of the photo, using the aperture to
change the depth of field, deliberately blurring part or all of the scene
(by moving the camera or zooming the lens while using a slow shutter
speed, HDR or other post processing techniques. That was the reason I
found SWS comments so interesting and helpful. He didn't disagree with my
concept, but my execution of the concept. Since I am really a novice at
all of this, I am very interested in ideas that will help me move along in
my skills. I do have a problem with over sharping images, and that was my
first attempt at using Photomatrix to develop an HDR photo. I play on
redoing this photo using SWS suggestions. I actually processed this HDR
from one photo shot in RAW, and adjusted the exposure and brightness in
post processing, saving the photo in PSD and then combining them using
Photomatrix.


Reg-

I always enjoy viewing your photos. I've posted a few of my Photomatix HDR
experiments "over there" for your review.

RG

RG wrote:
Eisboch,
Thanks for the comment, and I too disagree with Harry about a photograph
should be limited to "You are there" or "Postcard" record of a scenic
view. If I limited myself to this kind of photography, I would get bored
very quickly. The best photos I have seen have been manipulated in some
fashion, either by perspective, a very unique angle, shutter speed (to
enrich the colors or blur all or part of the photo, using the aperture to
change the depth of field, deliberately blurring part or all of the scene
(by moving the camera or zooming the lens while using a slow shutter
speed, HDR or other post processing techniques. That was the reason I
found SWS comments so interesting and helpful. He didn't disagree with my
concept, but my execution of the concept. Since I am really a novice at
all of this, I am very interested in ideas that will help me move along in
my skills. I do have a problem with over sharping images, and that was my
first attempt at using Photomatrix to develop an HDR photo. I play on
redoing this photo using SWS suggestions. I actually processed this HDR
from one photo shot in RAW, and adjusted the exposure and brightness in
post processing, saving the photo in PSD and then combining them using
Photomatrix.


Reg-

I always enjoy viewing your photos. I've posted a few of my Photomatix HDR
experiments "over there" for your review.

RG



RG,
All I have to say is WOW, DAMN NICE. It is obvious I need to improve my
skills.

RG,
All I have to say is WOW, DAMN NICE. It is obvious I need to improve my
skills.


Thanks. Have you taken a look at Capture NX yet? I started using it a few
months ago, and it quickly became my raw converter and image editor of
choice. I now do all of my raw conversion and most of my editing in CNX,
only going to Photoshop when I need to use some specialized tools that are
unique to Photoshop. For someone who shoots Nikon raw files, CNX has a lot
to offer.

RG wrote:
RG,
All I have to say is WOW, DAMN NICE. It is obvious I need to improve my
skills.


Thanks. Have you taken a look at Capture NX yet? I started using it a few
months ago, and it quickly became my raw converter and image editor of
choice. I now do all of my raw conversion and most of my editing in CNX,
only going to Photoshop when I need to use some specialized tools that are
unique to Photoshop. For someone who shoots Nikon raw files, CNX has a lot
to offer.



I am using Lightroom for Raw Conversations, do you know the difference
between Lightroom and Capture NX?

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
RG wrote:
RG,
All I have to say is WOW, DAMN NICE. It is obvious I need to improve
my skills.


Thanks. Have you taken a look at Capture NX yet? I started using it
a few months ago, and it quickly became my raw converter and image
editor of choice. I now do all of my raw conversion and most of my
editing in CNX, only going to Photoshop when I need to use some
specialized tools that are unique to Photoshop. For someone who
shoots Nikon raw files, CNX has a lot to offer.


I am using Lightroom for Raw Conversations, do you know the difference
between Lightroom and Capture NX?


Hmmm. Many people prefer to have their "raw conversations" in a more
dimly lit room.