Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
From | PeterN |
Date | 12/03/2013 13:29 (12/03/2013 07:29) |
Message-ID | <l7kiou02q7p@news6.newsguy.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Floyd L. Davidson |
Followups | Floyd L. Davidson (16h & 26m) > PeterN |
Floyd L. DavidsonTherein lies the rub. What is essential is often a matter of individual taste. My personal taste is minimalistic and interpretative. (with partial exceptions for wildlife.) I don''t want to drag another person into this, but there is one contributor in this group who takes documentary images. I tend to comment on the images as if they were intended to be the type of interpretative work that I like to do. He tends to leave far more detail in his images than I would. But, that doesn't mean his work is not good photography. Indeed it is.
Let me quote something for you to put some perspective on what makes a photograph:
"When nothing superfluous is included and nothing indispensable left out, one can understand the interrelation of the whole and its parts, as well as the hierarchic scale of importance and power by which some structural features are dominant, others subordinate." Rudolf Arhheim, "Entropy and Art", 1971
The key concept is that each image has parts arranged according to "the hierarchic scale of importance and power by which some structural features are dominant, other subordinate." The photographer is responsible for prioritizing each part and then through composition, content, and other measures placing each item in exactly the right place on that hierarchic scale. That is the way in which pre-visualization, camera work, and post processing are tightly associated, each helping to provide that exactly right arrangement.