Your Photos as Communication

[jjeling]

Yes and no. I wish I could find the quote about photographers and painters. It was based around the fact that photographers can never make something up when they take a picture, where as painters can paint whatever they want. Without photoshop this is true, and my ideal situation. Photographers and painters, artists alike, are trying to portray a certain message, which reverts back to our other discussion. The one thing that I think photography does to seperate itself, is that we have to deal with something that is already present, or temporarily present in order for us to function. We cannot create images from thin air. Cameras cannot function, unless there is something in front of the lens.
Our methods are different, while painters paint with paint, we paint with light. Sculptors paint with steel, clay, or whatever the medium may be. In the end, the subject matter may be the same or completely opposite. It is likely to be explained and interpreted differently. No two images are the same, and it applies to paintings and sculptures.

[casil403]

Yes and no. I wish I could find the quote about photographers and painters. It was based around the fact that photographers can never make something up when they take a picture, where as painters can paint whatever they want.

JJ was this the quote?

"Not everybody trusts paintings but people believe photographs." Ansel Adams

I don't think Ansel ever used photoshop and I'll bet he sometimes turns in his grave with all the technology available out there today. I wonder what he would have to say about it all......

Speaking on the subject of technology, I think that's a huge difference b/w painters/scuplturists and photographers. I mean, photography is an ever changing and advancing medium. Painting and similar mediums haven't really changed much and I think they are still far more dependent on being hands-on (for want of a better word).
Sorry if I am getting off topic here, but it was something I've been wondering......

[F8&Bthere]

I think I "got" Kat's Alone/What Now photo right away, which is why I disagreed with those who wished to see more face- it's dark and seeing face wouldn't add anything. The subject looking down and away adds to the emotion IMO.

Mad Aussie- as much as I love the little birdie amputee storyline, are you sure his 2nd leg isn't tucked in up under his wing or something? I think I can see something going back up from his little knee. Birds can do some crazy joint movements that would put us humans in the circus. Wicked shot at any rate- love it!

[Mad Aussie]

I think I "got" Kat's Alone/What Now photo right away, which is why I disagreed with those who wished to see more face- it's dark and seeing face wouldn't add anything. The subject looking down and away adds to the emotion IMO.

Mad Aussie- as much as I love the little birdie amputee storyline, are you sure his 2nd leg isn't tucked in up under his wing or something? I think I can see something going back up from his little knee. Birds can do some crazy joint movements that would put us humans in the circus. Wicked shot at any rate- love it!

I watched this bird for about 30 mins ... it's either chewed off or deformed in a weird way. I know what you are looking at and I stared at that for ages also and finally gave up trying to decide. Either way this bird has no use for that leg.

And ditto from me for your comment on Kat's photo.

[kiley9806]

[QUOTE=Mad Aussie;15290] it's either chewed off or deformed in a weird way. Either way this bird has no use for that leg. [QUOTE]

it looks to me like the leg got broken very badly, bend backwards, and healed that way. looks like the 'knee-joint' is frozen snapped back, with what we would call his 'shin' pointing back & up. any way you look at it, it makes me think owwie...

[Mad Aussie]

it's either chewed off or deformed in a weird way. Either way this bird has no use for that leg.

it looks to me like the leg got broken very badly, bend backwards, and healed that way. looks like the 'knee-joint' is frozen snapped back, with what we would call his 'shin' pointing back & up. any way you look at it, it makes me think owwie...

Yeh, I think this quite likely.

[BlueX]

JJ was this the quote?

I don't think Ansel ever used photoshop and I'll bet he sometimes turns in his grave with all the technology available out there today. I wonder what he would have to say about it all......

Speaking on the subject of technology, I think that's a huge difference b/w painters/scuplturists and photographers. I mean, photography is an ever changing and advancing medium. Painting and similar mediums haven't really changed much and I think they are still far more dependent on being hands-on (for want of a better word).
Sorry if I am getting off topic here, but it was something I've been wondering......

I think Ansel Adams would have jumped right into digital photography. He spent considerable amounts of time in the dark room getting the prints the way he wanted them. He'd even gone back into the darkroom with earlier prints when new darkroom technology developed.

And other mediums have also improved over the years too, not just photography. 3-D animation is just painting and sculpting in a computer. The paint brush and chisel is kind of like film to us nowadays.

Here's another analogy of how a photographer creates and communicates their message:

Consider the writer. He or she does not create any new words. They must communicate something by rearranging preexisting words around until it says what they are try to illustrate. If you sit 2 people in front of the same window and have them write a paragraph of what they see out the window, you will get 2 different paragraphs. The writer with better understanding of their craft and skill set will communicate their vision more eloquently.

A photographer has total control of what he or she captures. The messages are there, it is the photographer's job to make the pieces fall into place.