Quote:
Originally Posted by kgoings
So you don't think that 'feel' is more related to the direction 'art' is headed these days? I have seen some EPIC digital photos printed out that I think still had that 'feel'
And IMHO a photo is not a photo till its printed.
|
mmmm, now that indeed takes the conversation in an interesting direction
I suppose if you want to break an image down to its bare, simplistic elements, there are only four components to the 'look' of an image.
1) the composition of the image
2) the medium it is captured with.
3) the processing applied to it.
4) the medium it is displayed on.
I specifically used "displayed on" as my verb of choice. What is printing? A glossy color print? A B&W double weight fiber? canvas? pixels
?
It's all art, so then I would expand your definition to say that your vision of the photo is not complete unless it is displayed on a specific printed medium.
Different types of photos show milder or more pronounced telltale signs of the equipment they are produced on. With enough processing, anything can be made to look like anything else (Anyone seen the movie Avatar lately?). The point being if I take 100 random scenes and pictures from a film camera and 100 random pictures and scenes from a digital camera and handed them to you in 2 stacks, could you tell me which stack was digital and which stack was film if the stacks were fresh-from-the-camera un processed? I believe the answer is often "yes" to that question.
Sure, you can process the images from a digital camera to look like film... sorta, kinda, maybe.... but some are easier to do that with than others.... and crap, I'm rambling... lets try a simple summary: If you're art direction is to mimic film with digital, you can do it, but it can take work, lots of it, because you're starting with a product that most definitely is not film, the uncut image from a digital is very different than film.
I know a guy that painted our hallway at home. It's drywall.... but he's such an awesome painter that it looks like wood, even when you're a foot away.
If a digital photo needs to look like film, it can... but it sure didnt start out looking that way.
Really, i'm not sure if that made any sense... this has been a welcome diversion to what has been one of the hardest days in a long time for me, but i'm pretty fried at this point and don't know if that will have any sense when I read it again in the morning.....
(hope that doesn't sound too adversarial, just having a little friendly banter on the subject
)