> Placiau: http://nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2009/04/denmark.html
> http://www.pressefotografforbundet.dk/index.php?id=11708

Labai juokingai atrodo lyginimas su „RAW“ failu :)

> Idomu butu isgirsti profesionalu nuomone

Nesu profesionalas, bet vienas iš jų išsireiškė labai gerai:
(The Top Photography Myths http://bythom.com/myths.htm )

1--Photography Documents Reality
I'm constantly amused when discussions break out about the validity of 
using Photoshop to tweak colors or to retouch a small imperfection. 
"People expect photos to document the real world, and you should print 
images as you took them" goes one argument. Poppycock. The mere act of 
taking a picture destroys the ability to "capture" reality.

You choose which lens to use. You choose where to focus. You choose the 
exposure. You choose the composition. You choose a direction to point 
the camera. You choose what time of day and what season to take a 
picture. You choose the exact moment to preserve (and may distort that 
moment by using an extremely long or short shutter speed). You choose 
the type of film used (or the digital camera's color settings). And the 
list goes on. Meanwhile, reality also includes the moments before and 
after the shot, the area outside the frame, and much, much more. In 
short, you as photographer are making choices for the eventual viewer of 
your photo. The viewer only sees what you want them to, period.

On my living room wall is a large Ansel Adams print (Wonder Lake and Mt. 
Denali). It's a powerful image that captures the same spirit I felt 
standing in that same spot years later. But Adams shot in black and 
white. And he clearly manipulated the contrast in the final print. Even 
more interesting is that over the many years that Adams produced prints 
of that image, it appears that his burning and dodging techniques 
changed--later versions seem more contrasty and brooding than earlier 
ones. The exposure appears to be taken in very early morning on an 
unusually clear day (you can sit on that same spot for 20 days running 
and sometimes not see the full mountain). Did he document reality? I'd 
say no. He created an image that conveyed what he saw and how he felt in 
the presence of this immense mountain and Alaska's ever-changing light. 
And if you think he did document reality, try this exercise: take a 
large format camera and some black and white film to that same spot and 
try to duplicate the image. I'm betting that you'll find that very 
difficult to do, and only possible if you spend some time manipulating 
the final print. (My very different interpretation of the same subject 
is used at the top of this page.)

So one of the first lessons I try to teach in photography classes is to 
break the mental constraint that you, as photographer, are merely 
"recording" something. No. You're carefully manipulating the scene using 
all the tools and tricks available to you, all in order to produce an 
image that conveys what you saw and felt.


ic
--
http://rimantas.com/