You know what bothers me?

[Big]

On the other hand, read Ansel's "The Camera", "The Negative" and "The Print", and you'll find that each step of the photographic process is important. It's never ever been about getting it all done at the time of the shutter press. That's always just been step one towards a great photo.

Do you also know of any books or sites to look at for composition? This seems to be a problem of mine. (yes I know about rule of thirds but people say it's a habit to break, so I'm confused).

 

[CSR Studio]

Big, you have a good eye but it seems that you try too hard sometimes. Just photograph, use your instinct, don't over think it.

The Ansel Adams books, The Camera, The Negative and The Print are invaluable. I would also suggest Photography by London and Upton, it covers everything from film to digital to lighting and composition.

Just keep shooting, you are on the right track.

 

[Plato]

Still looking forward to your demonstration of how that was all "impossible" with Kodachrome.

I'm waiting to hear how printing a Kodachrome slide through a colored filter improves the image.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Still looking forward to your demonstration of how that was all "impossible" with Kodachrome.

I'm waiting to hear how printing a Kodachrome slide through a colored filter improves the image.

As stated by someone else "improvement" is subjective.

It does not change the fact that PP of Kodachrome was not neither impossible nor rare. Even if not done by the photographer, a lot of PP was done by the art departments of clients. Whether magazines or others.

 

[CSR Studio]

Still looking forward to your demonstration of how that was all "impossible" with Kodachrome.

I'm waiting to hear how printing a Kodachrome slide through a colored filter improves the image.

No one has said that.

But it actually could. If the image had been photographed under tungsten lighting your image on the slide would be yellow red, you would add to the filter pack blue cyan to cancel out the yellow red and it would improve the image on the print. It would be color corrected, just like we do in PS today.

 

[Plato]

Still looking forward to your demonstration of how that was all "impossible" with Kodachrome.

I'm waiting to hear how printing a Kodachrome slide through a colored filter improves the image.

No one has said that.

But it actually could. If the image had been photographed under tungsten lighting your image on the slide would be yellow red, you would add to the filter pack blue cyan to cancel out the yellow red and it would improve the image on the print. It would be color corrected, just like we do in PS today.

Touche!

 

[CSR Studio]

I'm waiting to hear how printing a Kodachrome slide through a colored filter improves the image.

No one has said that.

But it actually could. If the image had been photographed under tungsten lighting your image on the slide would be yellow red, you would add to the filter pack blue cyan to cancel out the yellow red and it would improve the image on the print. It would be color corrected, just like we do in PS today.

Touche!

Where is your demonstration of how that was all "impossible" with Kodachrome?

 

[Plato]

No one has said that.

But it actually could. If the image had been photographed under tungsten lighting your image on the slide would be yellow red, you would add to the filter pack blue cyan to cancel out the yellow red and it would improve the image on the print. It would be color corrected, just like we do in PS today.

Touche!

Where is your demonstration of how that was all "impossible" with Kodachrome?

Your dear friend Buckster made the following statement in post #2:
"Their editing program was called a dark room, and they did pretty much everything we still do today. In fact, they invented pretty much everything we do today."
Unfortunately, he was unable to maintain continuity of thought within the thread.

According to his original definition, it IS impossible with Kodachrome. The darkroom equipment sold for somewhere around a quarter million dollars in 1960s dollars! That's several million dollars in today's money. Now, of course, nothing's truly "impossible" and I'm sure that someone can allege that there were photographers that did purchase the equipment but I certainly won't believe it.

 

[CSR Studio]

What does that^ have to do with the following:

Many of the finest pics to have ever existed were done with Kodachrome, where PP was a physical impossibility.

You can't really believe that statement.

 

[Plato]

What does that^ have to do with the following:

Many of the finest pics to have ever existed were done with Kodachrome, where PP was a physical impossibility.

You can't really believe that statement.

Clearly, you're not familiar with Kodachrome. I'm outta here.

 

[CSR Studio]

What does that^ have to do with the following:

Many of the finest pics to have ever existed were done with Kodachrome, where PP was a physical impossibility.

You can't really believe that statement.

Clearly, you're not familiar with Kodachrome. I'm outta here.

I'm very familiar with it. You obviously can't come up with anything but then again you couldn't with the improving a slide to a print either and I did.

 

[CSR Studio]

If you guys would stick around and not get your egos bruised you might learn something, if you can admit it that is.

 

[Buckster]

Touche!

Where is your demonstration of how that was all "impossible" with Kodachrome?

Your dear friend Buckster made the following statement in post #2:
"Their editing program was called a dark room, and they did pretty much everything we still do today. In fact, they invented pretty much everything we do today."
Unfortunately, he was unable to maintain continuity of thought within the thread.

Semantics as a defense is silly. PP was done throughout the industry, especially in glamor, fashion and advertising, even when shot with Kodachrome. It wasn't "impossible".

Sorry you seem to have taken it so personal.

 

[joeywpc]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It's a bit like makeup on women, some prefer a natural look, some prefer artistic application. Some viewers appreciate post processing, some photographers over use it. The simple fact is that a lot of factors go into making a great photo and over processing can take away the effect of getting all of the basic factors right and can ruin an otherwise great photo.

 

[Randall Ellis]

Do you also know of any books or sites to look at for composition? This seems to be a problem of mine. (yes I know about rule of thirds but people say it's a habit to break, so I'm confused).

I strongly suggest non-photography books for this because photography specific books tend to focus (pardon please the pun) primarily on technology rather than the core concepts of line, form, shape, value, etc.

For learning design and composition I would suggest books like Pictorial Composition (ISBN: 0486233588) or A painter's guide to design and composition (ISBN: 1581806434). Also consider taking a design course at the local community college. There is precious little taught in Design I and II that does not directly apply to photography, yet few people with cameras appear to have any idea of how important these concepts are.

The only people who should break composition rules are those who already have an ingrained understanding of a) why those rules are considered rules in the first place (and no, being able to recite them has nothing to do with understanding them) and b) why, specifically, breaking them will add impact, rather than reduce or eliminate it. These rules did not rise to the level of rule over night - they got that status because they really do work, very well, as proven by hundreds and hundreds of years of still powerful art, and until you understand why, you should not be concerned about arbitrarily breaking them. You'll never be more than lucky every once in a great while ignoring these rules, but if you learn them, and more to the point, understand them, fundamentally, you will be able to know exactly when they should be used and when they should be broken for maximum effect and your work will improve dramatically...

- Randy