If your photos don't lie, they're not good enough.

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 4 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 7

  • @zufarmul
    @zufarmul 9 днів тому +1

    Thank you for this rather inspirational video. It was thought provoking indeed.

  • @WakoJacKooo
    @WakoJacKooo 10 днів тому +1

    keep up the good work tom

  • @lightsandtones
    @lightsandtones 11 днів тому +2

    Tom, you have touched very sensitive topic. I agree and I don't. Basically we accepted black and white photos for decades but they have nothing to do with reality. 🙂 Because photography is a form of art it's very subjective. If we just think about Picasso and his famous distorted portraits. They were a conclusion of something. And I think we can use this approach to photography as well. At the end the photos we re creating are a conclusion or interpretation of our mood, circumstances, creative possibilities and so on. I would say they are a reflection of the message we want to convey. We just don't have to label them as "reality".

    • @luzr6613
      @luzr6613 10 днів тому

      Is photography necessarily a form of 'art' though? It is certainly different from what were called the 'Fine Arts' - the key difference being that photography has to begin with an actual-factual from the world without (that then may be manipulated), whereas Picasso didn't require any real-world starting point, and nor does a musician or a sculptor. I know that this calls on a distinction that is largely ignored today, but the distinction is still real - without an external reality of light and forms to Record, photography doesn't exist. The idea that B&W has 'nothing to do with reality' is also debatable. B&W is reality without the evolutionary emergence of cones in the (mammalian) eye - an inability to differentiate wavelengths of light doesn't alter external reality one bit; only a specific organism's perception of it. Now i know that these two points don't really undermine the point you are making - we can do as we wish with our images, for whatever reasons we may have - and most of us probably have boundaries around how far we think it is acceptable to go in securing or in messing with 'the scene' (or maybe not?).

  • @paulolden4337
    @paulolden4337 10 днів тому +1

    Skies have been swapped out since the beginning of the photography medium in the 1800's.
    Nothing wrong with that as long as they are real skies and not A.I. created.

    • @Sven-R
      @Sven-R 10 днів тому +1

      Depends on every photographer's own bounderies. I have swapped out skies, not very often, but my bounderies are not only "no AI", it's also "it must be a sky I took a photo of".

    • @luzr6613
      @luzr6613 10 днів тому +3

      Of course, the fact that something has been done for a long time doesn't mean that it's a good thing to do.