Why I take photos.

[zulu42]

My apologies to the OP for drifting so far off topic, but the conversation has been very interesting and enjoyable.

Agreed on all counts.

Let me relate a short tale. In Iceland recently we went out to shoot the Aurora. I was just a gray cloud to the eye and at an 8 sec. exposure. A fellow shooter said to try 30 second and increase your ISO. "Viola" I had a green glow streaking across the sky the eye could not see. Then he said to use the same exposure but turn the flash on and have someone stand in front of the camera under the Aurora, then walk away after the flash. Like magic, I had a picture of a person with the Aurora behind them. So, is this a case of artistically enhancing a photo or using your knowledge of the mechanics of digital technology to capture the shot?

Or how about calling it good old fashioned photography? Nothing even specific to digital in any of those techniques.

And if your final image still has that gray cloud, you might consider burning it to black (like Ansel did above) in order to accentuate the contrast of the green Aurora.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

Zulu you are correct, it is in the end good old fashion photography.

But technology has got us from, cropping, adjusting for color and contrast, dodging and burning, all standard photographic techniques both for film and digital; to adding, modifying and combining images. (Photo Shopping to use some slang terminology?)

There is nothing inherently wrong with this, in fact it was opened and entirely new and exciting world to the photographic tinkerer both pro and amateur. It certainly has helped the creative juices among the artistic folks in the hobby. Not to forget, shooting digital and post processing where you can recover a poor shot and never having to worry about how many shots are left on the roll.

But I believe there is much to be said for cruising a lake in a canoe vs. a speed boat, choosing cross country skis vs. a snowmobile, a quick bike ride vs. a motorcycle. None of the above methods are right or wrong, just matters of personal preference or convenience. Hence my preference for photos as nearer to "as shot" rather than "as created".

But as pointed out, it is in the end good old fashion photography.

 

[zulu42]

Well stated Ron. I find joy in all types of photography. I keep an old rangefinder (currently Argus C3) and a film SLR (currently K1000) with me. Interestingly, when I get my film prints and scans, I leave them untouched. I could have my way with the scans in photoshop, or construct and learn to use a darkroom, but I prefer the challenge of getting as close to my vision with the original exposure. It's how I used to shoot film - mostly because I was unaware of what could actually be done in post. I also like the "innocence" of straight prints combined with the aesthetics of film. Comparable to that canoe you mentioned. With digital I shoot with the whole post process in mind - knowing that the "look" I want to achieve in the final image may not be what shows on the camera LCD. Quite ironically, my digital process 'feels' closer to Ansel's than my film method - to me.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

Zulu, Right on, I have found that photography is like exploring a an old gold mine of cave. Just when you think you have reached the end of a tunnel or passage; "Oh look" another entrance.

Again I enjoyed the conversations and the exchange of ideas on this thread and I am sure our path will cross on other posts.