reality without real
I was just perusing an old blog from last month with snaps made after dark, and it occurred to me that none of these pictures have been doctored or "touched up" in any way by Photoshop or Lightroom. I am now asking myself why do I have the Adobe Creative Suite and even Lightroom 3, when I am using the image straight from the "set-it-and-forget-it" RAW image converting software. I guess that I have this top-of-the-line and cutting-edge-software so that I can be like a "Jones", or maybe a friend of the "Jones's", or maybe I should just be able to say that I have it, as not having it might make me a lesser entity in the photographic eyes of the world. So as a typical Caribbean person I just can't have my money sitting there and I am not getting anything from it, so I may now have to see about 'getting my money's worth' from these software ... but herein lies the dilemma.
I don't know if it is because I may be old and somewhat cranky, but I do not see the need to alter the reality that today's photographic subjects present. I am quite content with and appreciative of the reality that I come in contact with every day ... and night, in all aspects of Nature, ranging from the inanimate to the animate, and on up too the articulate. I know what I see and feel, and I feel that I would like to reproduce what I see and feel using the reproductive tools of this trade. This is the most serious challenge I think I face ... that of getting some man made devices and materials to perfectly reproduce on and in various media, tangible or intangible, an image that was formed in my mind and brain and captured on an optical device. This is my challenge in photography, and for me this is what photography is all about ... well, not quite all of the time, but most of it.
At my new age I have learned to appreciate the photo presentations of photographers. Everyone has a unique outlook on photography and a lot of us still need to learn to appreciate that, and develop a respect for all other photographers and their images which they create and share with us. I now think it is unethical and downright 'low' to critique anyones creative photographic presentations. If they want to break all the so-called established rules, so what? They are free to do that and to create the images that they can see way down in their soul, because that is where your photographic gift may be coming from. When you reach way down there and pull something out and some 'tipsy' "joker" is going to critique your best creative work ... it is not easy, but don't let that bother you, your photography is between You and God, the giver of your photographic talent and ability ... half the time is grudge they grudge ... and they can't stop it.
I know some of you can't handle my language, or more precisely, don't want to handle it, and you don't have to, but I know and you know that, but in the privacy of your closet or chamber, you are not as well behaved as you let you neighbour and friends believe. When you learn to face reality, you will find that you become a much better person, and really begin to enjoy life on a totally new level. Drop the mask, and be yourself ... you will be open and honest with all men, and not have to solicit any help for the "spirits" in the bottle. It is not strange that even in the recession booze is selling well, and the local brand name contraband may also be available island wide ...
As I was saying, since I have no great interest in altering the reality of my natural world, it seems that Photoshop and Lightroom may not be critical to any reproduction process that I require. I sometimes wonder if Photoshop is the ultimate software tool? Has nobody on the planet the ability to create a similar or better imaging tool? So you want me to believe that Photoshop is the most popular tool in Russia and Japan and China? I need to see stats on this? I recall a few years ago I was using the Raw Shooter software. Then out came Raw Shooter Premium, a professional upgrade, but by the time my 30-day trial was done and I sought to buy it, I got directed to an Adobe web page informing the take over of Raw Shooter. I have not seen any of the advanced Raw Shooter Premium features in Lightroom, but maybe they are now in Lightroom 3, so I may have to look. This is business and competition, and it seems to be more than just about the "survival of the fittest".
Can photographers survive without Photoshop and Lightroom? I don't know that answer, I am not using either of them any day yet, but then I am not working, nor selling my photography, and even I do have to now, I don't think that I have to crank up the Photoshop or Lightroom software to make that buck. I guess it all depends on your touch of reality.
[to be continued]
I don't know if it is because I may be old and somewhat cranky, but I do not see the need to alter the reality that today's photographic subjects present. I am quite content with and appreciative of the reality that I come in contact with every day ... and night, in all aspects of Nature, ranging from the inanimate to the animate, and on up too the articulate. I know what I see and feel, and I feel that I would like to reproduce what I see and feel using the reproductive tools of this trade. This is the most serious challenge I think I face ... that of getting some man made devices and materials to perfectly reproduce on and in various media, tangible or intangible, an image that was formed in my mind and brain and captured on an optical device. This is my challenge in photography, and for me this is what photography is all about ... well, not quite all of the time, but most of it.
At my new age I have learned to appreciate the photo presentations of photographers. Everyone has a unique outlook on photography and a lot of us still need to learn to appreciate that, and develop a respect for all other photographers and their images which they create and share with us. I now think it is unethical and downright 'low' to critique anyones creative photographic presentations. If they want to break all the so-called established rules, so what? They are free to do that and to create the images that they can see way down in their soul, because that is where your photographic gift may be coming from. When you reach way down there and pull something out and some 'tipsy' "joker" is going to critique your best creative work ... it is not easy, but don't let that bother you, your photography is between You and God, the giver of your photographic talent and ability ... half the time is grudge they grudge ... and they can't stop it.
I know some of you can't handle my language, or more precisely, don't want to handle it, and you don't have to, but I know and you know that, but in the privacy of your closet or chamber, you are not as well behaved as you let you neighbour and friends believe. When you learn to face reality, you will find that you become a much better person, and really begin to enjoy life on a totally new level. Drop the mask, and be yourself ... you will be open and honest with all men, and not have to solicit any help for the "spirits" in the bottle. It is not strange that even in the recession booze is selling well, and the local brand name contraband may also be available island wide ...
As I was saying, since I have no great interest in altering the reality of my natural world, it seems that Photoshop and Lightroom may not be critical to any reproduction process that I require. I sometimes wonder if Photoshop is the ultimate software tool? Has nobody on the planet the ability to create a similar or better imaging tool? So you want me to believe that Photoshop is the most popular tool in Russia and Japan and China? I need to see stats on this? I recall a few years ago I was using the Raw Shooter software. Then out came Raw Shooter Premium, a professional upgrade, but by the time my 30-day trial was done and I sought to buy it, I got directed to an Adobe web page informing the take over of Raw Shooter. I have not seen any of the advanced Raw Shooter Premium features in Lightroom, but maybe they are now in Lightroom 3, so I may have to look. This is business and competition, and it seems to be more than just about the "survival of the fittest".
Can photographers survive without Photoshop and Lightroom? I don't know that answer, I am not using either of them any day yet, but then I am not working, nor selling my photography, and even I do have to now, I don't think that I have to crank up the Photoshop or Lightroom software to make that buck. I guess it all depends on your touch of reality.
[to be continued]
Comments