|
|
Michele Beccia
{K:16491} 1/29/2004
|
Very cool! :)
|
|
|
|
|
Subha Pindiproli
{K:10108} 5/15/2003
|
i assumed you employed a blue cokin filter here, to get the blue feel to this shot. you are a well traveled man... would like to hear from you about your experience in Burma..
|
|
|
|
|
Lee Horn
{K:256} 12/22/2002
|
brilliant photograph... congratualtions on a great shoot.
|
|
|
|
|
Bart Aldrich
{K:7614} 12/20/2002
|
Nice clean image, great reflection and color. Simple but beautiful.
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Cajot
{K:7793} 12/20/2002
|
1. Well Darin, you shouldn't say and think that digital is easy. Try it, it is not. I have made laboratory work and digital now, and I know that one is as difficult and time eater than the other.
2. You speak of cheating. What do you think of optical cheating ? The choice of a lense is cheating ? It doesn't respect the original conditions of a landscape, the rendition of the colors in a portrait, the perspective...
3. What do you think about chemical cheating ? Is the choice of Velvia some kind of cheating ? Is the zone system some kind of cheating ? The choice of a product for high or low contrast...
In fact, the question is : do we have the control of the picture that we make or not. If you control, you cheat. If you don't control, it is snapshot.
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Cajot
{K:7793} 12/20/2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
Darrin James
{K:3944} 12/20/2002
|
Marc, I consider myself cheating if I digitally manipulate. I don't judge others. In fact you will notice some positive comments I have made to digital submissions. As far as the rules are concerned I didn't think there really were any. For me it is too easy to digitally manipulate. Basically, if the original doesn't do it, then I don't like to enhance.
My goal when I shoot is to capture the culture of where I am, to show the wonderful places I go in the most honest way I can.
Yes, I sell my work, it is never digitally manipulated though.
I evaluate the photograph, not the photographer. The creative end result is what I merit, digital or otherwise.
Thanks, Darrin
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Gougenheim
{K:5398} 12/20/2002
|
I just read the previous comments, after posting mine, and I'm back to add something.
1) I almost proposed the same thing to you as Andre did, but then didn't because I thought it was too minor a problem to justify the usage of PS.
2) But now I see that you consider touching up a detail with PS is "cheating", so I have a few questions, if I may...
a) What are the rules of the game ? I mean, there can't be any cheating if there are't any rules that can be broken, right ? Among the rules you have set for yourself, and which I am in no position to contest - since they are just yours, and not mine -, there should be a goal to achieve in order to win. What is your goal, when taking pictures ?
b) Do you sell your work ? And if you do, how do you feel if the buyer edits your image before publishing it ?
c) How do you evaluate the merit of a photographer taking a picture ?
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Gougenheim
{K:5398} 12/20/2002
|
Simple and nice. Not much to complain about... Well done.
|
|
|
|
|
Darrin James
{K:3944} 12/20/2002
|
Thanks Andre. I make it a rule that I do not alter my images in any way other than cropping and cleaning up any scan deficiences. Using the clone tool in my mind is cheating. What you see is as close to the original as I can get.
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Cajot
{K:7793} 12/20/2002
|
Good shot, with high colors (Velvia!)and a good composition. Have you ever thought to clone out the white spots in the line view of the fisher (and rebuild somehow the horizon line) ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reynaldo Guimaraes
{K:2422} 12/20/2002
|
Darrin, thanks visiting my pict of today.
I am very impressed with your work.
All the pict are just wonderful. In everything.
I added my coming here because up to now no one had left a comment here and there is nothing else to be said about your photos than that they are wonderful.
|
|
0 
