Seriously though Joan, its Concept I try to illuminate rather than Pro/Con Good/Bad. Behind the contents of the thread I hope to show the diversity of Concept within Photography and Digital Alteration.
How this will filter through into the art world/ artists world is yet to be seen. As Sher rightly said very early on in the thread, we are indeed in Historic Times Artistically, so much change, so much to re-catagorise, so much to re-assess. Conceptually I feel Art has reached a new threshold, a threshold some will embrace and others rebel against.
I live for the day when someone of John Enwrights Calibre uses a Digital work as the basis for one his wonderous paintings. When East meets West so to speak, I feel the imagery in Art will reach new limits of impact on the viewer.
Eva rightly points out what I think I tried to say at the beginning, that visually "The Fake" for want of a better phrase has far greater visual impact than the original. The 2 are indeed seperate images, but when Man made outshines Natural, I find the concept intriguing.
Has man tired of Natures natural beauty to the extent of accepting manufactured imagery as "more" exciting, or has Digital imagery become more powerful than Natural Imagery. I think these are good points to open up for discussion.
Love the input everyone, Thanx :-)Laz
I have done a quick Tut for Mike on another thread re: this concept of imagery manipulation.
Mike as most of you know, has become a full blown AW member. Such is his genuine interest in what he does, he is delighted to be in this position. He takes his ideas and what he sees/learns seriously. This I admire :-)
Whats all this got to do with this thread, well lets assume Mike Passes his Uni exams with Top Marks. Mike becomes the next photographic genius. His images can be of the highest calibre, yet his foe in the working world may well come from the computer whizz.
I guess this thread poses the question, in which future will these mediums survive ? Should Mike simultaneously learn every aspect of Digital manipulation or stick to being the supplier of photographic imagery to the Digital Overlords.
I think this fair reason to lay this concept open for a chat or 2, if only to be certain that such ideas are in the open and not hidden from view under the mountains of Beautiful Manipulations :-)
All the best everyone, Laz.
In my humble opinion you are 1 of the masters here on AW at your trade :-) I guess I'm just laying open my own inner thoughts re: everything posted here :-)
Great to see you again. All the best. Laz
The computer is doing what the photographers can do in the darkroom. You can smooth the lines on someone's face and make them look 20 years younger with a few clicks of the mouse or you can paint less lines into the face and make them look younger. You can make a perfect tree with the computer, add more shadows or do it with your paint brush.
Everyone is trying to improve on mother nature. In many cases the camera takes a better image than our eyes do. Which is real and which is fake? A scene thru a child's eyes and an old person's eyes is going to be very different. If they were both to interpret it on paper, which would be real and which would be fake?
It all comes down to what pleases the eye. Women have been trying to enhance what mother nature gave them since the dawn of time, LOL.
If I'm not getting what you're trying to say, don't give up on me, LOL!
Laz's Photoshop Body Enhancement Studio, for all your personal reshaping needs. hahaha
You are right Joan, the bulk of what I state is definately not new, but the concepts that lie behind what I'm aiming to illuminate are as yet to the greatest part undiscovered and uncreated.
The first image I posted and the one I manufactured for Mike are I believe good examples of why someone as unskilled as myself can not only pose a challenge or threat to Mikes skills, but moreover to the calibre of work HE must produce in order to maintain this WOW effect for his audience. I have a very unfair advantage in my scope to produce the extra-ordinary.
Scenario: Mike charges an arm and a leg to produce 1000 images of "X" model for a photoshoot. 9 images are picked for a shortlist of the 4 to be used.
The model gets paid, Mike gets paid, the studio costs, staffing and getting Mikes pictures to the cutting room. The list is endless. After all of this the Digital Specialists re-hash Mikes hard work to suit their own ends. It makes me wonder why bother with Mike ?
1 guy on a PC spends a few days knocking up the self same image. The magazines and financial backers of imagery realise that the cost is immensely smaller than the alternative. The circle gets smaller and so does the noose around photography's neck.
You say you are up to scratch Mike, but will that faith prevail and see you in good stead in the years to come ? True, no one can replace your eye for the shot, but the PC is catching up fast :-)
All in all, I have fragmented this into 2 new areas, Art and Commercial Art. The former is a real tough cookie to crack, very tough indeed. So many apply for the post yet so very very few even get through the door, let alone on rungs worth climbing. The top must be tough to define let alone reach. JE and Denny could fill in the blanks here :-)
I suspect those who reach the top are chosen, and are not those who climb hardest, chosen because those at the top know what it takes to be a dedicated visionary/artist/creator. Its simply impossible to explain why the chosen ones have it, but suffice to say, understanding this as a fact of life goes along way to grasping the unique qualities of the best.
The latter, is often the means by which many many opt to make a living. Though still a tough arena, the skills to produce the ideas of others is always going to be in demand and likewise bring rewards worthy of the artists ability to meet these requirements.
This I suppose fragments further to "Artistic Visionary Ability" and "Artistic Technical Ability". The ability of the Thinker and the ability of those who can produce it.
Will someone give me a job simply because I have good ideas, or because I can bring such ideas to imagery. Does anyone outside of "Producers" even care HOW the image came into being, so long as it Hits the Spot.
Ultimately, if Art, its production methods and its intrinsic values are a currency, which coin/bill/note is of the greatest value to aspiring and established artists alike ?
Concept or Depiction of Concept ?
Method of Depiction or Skill of Depiction ?
Who you are OR What you are ?
All answers on a postcard please to .....
I love delving into the vaults of Arts Real and Percieved Values. I sense a new horizon approaching, but as yet feel unable to grasp its dimensions :-)
All the best everyone Laz.
I think, my point is, all of what is new, on the horizon, has been said and done before with other advancements. The computer is just another tool. I'm sure there was distrust, for artists, when the first brushes were commercially made, or look at the advancement in paints. Is the true traditional artist the one who makes his own colors, brushes and canvasses? I wonder how he/she feels (felt) about going to an artstore to choose all of these items. Isn't it all the same?
What happened when the first photo was taken of a famous painting and now prints are sold? That must have been incredible. Now, you can even alter that print so no one knows that it's just a photo of the original piece of artwork.
I think your point is that we better all get with the program or we're going to be left behind, LOL! What do you think will be next? "I'm going to teleport Laz's artwork to my living room wall because it goes well with the new teleported sofa."
Imagine the game unfolding in your room on your floor. Imagine when movies are projected into a 3D space for us to look at all around. Hmmm lots of Nudie scenes.
Later Joan, Laz.
Secondly, I have two copies of this book and one copy I cut up and made a collage from, so I could see all of the awesome photos of the universe at once. Greedy I know. Which in a sense is playing with the real and making it unreal to put more drama into your artwork. I think any interpretation is fine as long as you tell people how you created it. I like to know with photos wether they are real or fiddled with in photoshop. That's just me, others may not mind.
Reply
Back to Category
