Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | Tony Cooper |
| Date | 2013-12-02 15:51 (2013-12-02 09:51) |
| Message-ID | <016p99ljucsvm9d5l1h0gucsv84m2tjgqh@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | nospam (22m) > Tony Cooper Sandman (23m) > Tony Cooper |
On 2 Dec 2013 09:56:05 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:
SandmanOf course he's suggesting following the herd. His position that Floyd should learn something new is clearly saying that Floyd should use something other than Linux and Gimp.
In article <929n995fplf31f9vvqffo6aqig2r24pr2j@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper wrote:SandmannospamTony Cooper
only because he refuses to learn anything new.
So what? Have you seen his images?
Yep.Tony CooperSandman
Why does he need to follow the herd in order to have machine-capabilities to process them any differently?
No one wants him to follow any "herd". That's some awkward thinking you've got ther. We are challening his ignorant and stupid claims about things he knows nothing about.
No, it follows the path that I've taken that good photography is seeing what is photographable and producing a good image from that. What goes on between the click of the shutter and the final image is immaterial to anyone other than the person with the camera.Tony CooperSandman
What it comes down to, in the area of photography, is whether or not the person produces good photographs. Floyd does.
Great, if we were talking about the "area of photography" and the merit's of ones photographs.
This is called a diversion.
Yes, it does. We can see that Floyd can take a good photograph and produce a good result using his choice of tools. We don't know if nospam can do the same. nospam has no credibility when commenting on what tools should be used.Tony CooperSandman
He's an opinionated, egotistical asshole here, but so are you. The difference is that we know Floyd's photographic output is good and we don't know if yours is or not.
And thus, for whatever reason, that means that nospam's opinion is worth less?
Anytime you access a large body of work by any photographer you will find images in that body that you don't feel were processed to the best advantage. In some cases, the photographer may not have thought the image was worth more work than was done.Tony CooperSandman
Put your money where your mouth is. If you have good photographs, and one of the reasons they are good is because you have some better processing system than Floyd's, show 'em.
Better than this:
You don't know what the photographer was going for in the image. The photographer may have had some concept about how the final image should appear that you don't agree with because agreement is a subjective analysis.
I'm not entirely sure why you're giving Floyd so much credit here, Tony. I'm not the kind of person that would try to find faults with other peoples photography, but staying in topic, I can say that there is nothing inherent in Floyds photographs that show any sign of a superior workflow.WTF has "workflow" got to do with why I give Floyd credit for being a good photographer? Why should I, or anyone, give a rat's ass about how he got to where he did? My assessment is based on the final result, not the steps taken to get there. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
2013-11-30-
-
