b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 10421803 (Thread)

# i don't know what you are saying there, but it sounds like a contradiction
(I helped save b3ta! real i'm not happy 'til you're not happy, Sun 15 May 2011, 10:35, archived)
# My point is that
photographs have always had 'post-production' done to them to various degrees (ie darkroom stuff, messing with the photo itself) and so the argument that Photoshop stops an image being a 'proper' photograph isn't completely valid. I will agree that the lines between photography and graphic arts are now VERY blurred, but in any form of art being able to fit things into categories is not always the most useful or productive thing
(I helped save b3ta! Citizen Cavy Admires your passion for conformity, Sun 15 May 2011, 10:38, archived)
# i will forever more refer to myself as a photographer
edited because it sounded pointlessly argumental
(I helped save b3ta! real i'm not happy 'til you're not happy, Sun 15 May 2011, 10:45, archived)
# No, I think the argument about the
status of photography/art is not useful or productive. I just disagree with where you place your distinction and your reason for it
(I helped save b3ta! Citizen Cavy Admires your passion for conformity, Sun 15 May 2011, 10:49, archived)
# ah, you replied
non of this makes sense now
however, i never intended to be productive when i expressed my opinion and i'm sure most photographers wouldn't give two hoots what i thought about post production.
my opinion is, for clarification, photography: pics developed as the pic was taken.
pic manipulation is not photography
(I helped save b3ta! real i'm not happy 'til you're not happy, Sun 15 May 2011, 10:51, archived)
# the keyword there is "developed"....
the darkroom developing process will always affect the final image to some degree (colour, contrast etc) with the developer manipulating these factors in order to produce the developers desired result.

doing it in photoshop is no different in that respect.
(duts Optimus whut?, Sun 15 May 2011, 11:14, archived)
# only to a certain degree though
my point is art is art, whatever it is, including phtography.
photgraphy is a photograph. if it has to be edited with a computer it's simply no longer a photograph
(I helped save b3ta! real i'm not happy 'til you're not happy, Sun 15 May 2011, 11:22, archived)
# i sorta agree with the other dude...
but i really liked this sentence. :D

*cleeeeek*
(I helped save b3ta! arrangedletters, Sun 15 May 2011, 12:46, archived)