Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-24-2015, 07:09 AM   #1
Veteran Member
redcat's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,892
Do we have this kind of photographers

I'm very interested in portraiture and recently I found this list (I only look at the Portrait,Beauty,Fashion part) :
Top 48 photographers to follow

and I can't stop asking myself if among our huge Pentaxian community, there are photographers like these guys !
Please name them, I'd love to follow and learn from them !
Many thanksssssss

04-24-2015, 07:18 AM   #2
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Woodstock, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,685
There's some very good names mentioned in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/173-general-photography/270280-best-penta...ographers.html
04-24-2015, 07:20 AM   #3
Pentaxian
zzeitg's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South Bohemia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,442
From what I can see there... lot of photoshopping... I'm not completly sure that I like this kind of hyper-reality creation. Many times it's impressive, but where is the border between photography and virtual reality (like video game graphics...)?
04-24-2015, 07:28 AM   #4
Veteran Member
manntax's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,972
QuoteOriginally posted by zzeitg Quote
From what I can see there... lot of photoshopping... I'm not completly sure that I like this kind of hyper-reality creation. Many times it's impressive, but where is the border between photography and virtual reality (like video game graphics...)?
exactly my impression. From just brief glance I can say that majority of these photographers are simply very skilled at staging the scene and then meticulously improving the raw material (a photo!) over and over via photoshop or other means.
Nothing against that but to me its more like a product photography, than about capturing something unique and short lasting. Again nothing wrong with that - it is an art in its own right, but It doesn't take my breath away to be honest - not nearly as much as some of the PHOTOS I saw on this forum !

04-24-2015, 08:10 AM   #5
Veteran Member
redcat's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,892
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by zzeitg Quote
From what I can see there... lot of photoshopping... I'm not completly sure that I like this kind of hyper-reality creation. Many times it's impressive, but where is the border between photography and virtual reality (like video game graphics...)?
I agree that a lot of dodging/burning to make the 3D look. Not all of them though, some are studio photog (hyper reality), some are natural light photog;
But the same quantity of retouch (dodging,burning,cloning...) can be found on top-notch landscape, macro, astro...
The question is know where to retouch, how to retouch so the final result (or "product" as you might call) become flawless.
04-24-2015, 08:19 AM   #6
Pentaxian
tvdtvdtvd's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,196
I'll be the first to say it, then duck behind the sofa: photography >is< virtual reality. No matter how 'realistic' a photograph
may appear, you reach out to touch or enter that photograph and you will hit that wall, (the surface of the paper, the monitor,
the canvas...), which separates you from the reality of existence and the virtual reality of the image.

Photography certainly captures a very 'realistic' impression of reality, and with great ease. A sculptor can capture an incredible
amount of reality though it will likely take many hours to do so. A wax mannequin can look almost lifelike, but as with the photograph,
you only need to reach out and touch to discover that reality is only virtual.

Every photograph has some aspect that belies its un-reality. Film grain. Loss of color (B&W). Exaggerated color and
dynamics (HDR). It's evident in a snapshot and it's evident in post production, be it masterful dodging and burning in the
darkroom or wizardly manipulation of curves and layers in photoshop. The digital revolution has simply made post production
so much easier to do and allowed for a broader range of possibilities.

I do think hyper-reality is a good description for that list of photographers work. It's not unlike the dramatically lit studio
portraiture that was in vogue in the 1980's, only now brought into the digital realm and turned up to 11. I can't say it really
appeals to me either, at least not the fairy-tale portraiture or HDR landscapes. I do like the abstract architectural work
and was somewhat surprised to see so many on that list, (well, more than 1).
04-24-2015, 08:36 AM   #7
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,183
I agree with zzeitg and manntax. Its almost like all the portraits are taken of the same person (some young, slender woman with perfect skin and really busy with some thoughts). And they all have this odd.. perfectly hidden flaws, and starkly emphasized features. Textures seem like they were painted on top of a porcelain statue..
But I guess part of it is that I generally don't care much for portraiture.

I think there are some Pentax photographers who do this kind of stuff, but I don't remember them off the top of my head. Some are even on this forum. With photos like that, it is all about setting up the light(s) and post processing. Camera and lens just need to provide high resolution. Bokeh isn't very visible, colours are digitally corrected anyway..

But to each their own! It a valid genre of photography
04-24-2015, 09:02 AM   #8
Veteran Member
redcat's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,892
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
There's some very good names mentioned in this thread: Best Pentax Photographers
Thank you for the link
Noted some name :
Benjamin Kanarek
Bill Gekas
Anton Lovchenko
Thomas Ohlsson

04-24-2015, 10:24 AM   #9
Pentaxian
pete-tarmigan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Conception Bay South, New-fun-land
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,216
QuoteOriginally posted by zzeitg Quote
From what I can see there... lot of photoshopping... I'm not completly sure that I like this kind of hyper-reality creation. Many times it's impressive, but where is the border between photography and virtual reality (like video game graphics...)?
Indeed. Most of the photos are so heavily processed that they look like they could be entirely computer-generated imagery, i.e., using no photos whatsoever. The photographers might as well save money by selling their cameras and lenses, staying at home and generating all the images from scratch with a computer.
04-24-2015, 11:08 AM - 1 Like   #10
Pentaxian
zzeitg's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South Bohemia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,442
QuoteOriginally posted by pete-tarmigan Quote
The photographers might as well save money by selling their cameras and lenses, staying at home and generating all the images from scratch with a computer.

That's exactly my feeling when I see such kind of shots. Why to bother with all the camera gear when equivalent (exaggerated ?) effect can be PC generated. There should be 2 different categories for every photography competition: standard photography and computer graphic. In my opinion it does not give much sense to mix these two...


One example for all (just to demonstrate what I'm talking about): https://500px.com/photo/85222707/falling-by-chris-lambeth?from=user
04-24-2015, 12:25 PM   #11
Pentaxian
tvdtvdtvd's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,196
QuoteOriginally posted by pete-tarmigan Quote
Indeed. Most of the photos are so heavily processed that they look like they could be entirely computer-generated imagery, i.e., using no photos whatsoever. The photographers might as well save money by selling their cameras and lenses, staying at home and generating all the images from scratch with a computer.
Perhaps, but the camera is still a very useful tool for capturing all that detail very quickly. Much more quickly
than it could be done to sketch a highly detailed, highly realistic portrait from scratch. That is the power of
the camera as a tool.

It would also be possible to purchase a large piece of land and grow all your own food. It's much more simple
to purchase the harvested and prepared ingredients from the store. Either way, you can still make a meal,
the the former will require a LOT more effort than the later.
04-24-2015, 12:27 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,420
QuoteOriginally posted by zzeitg Quote
That's exactly my feeling when I see such kind of shots. Why to bother with all the camera gear when equivalent (exaggerated ?) effect can be PC generated. There should be 2 different categories for every photography competition: standard photography and computer graphic. In my opinion it does not give much sense to mix these two...


One example for all (just to demonstrate what I'm talking about): https://500px.com/photo/85222707/falling-by-chris-lambeth?from=user
What makes you think that shot is not straight out of the camera?
04-24-2015, 01:28 PM   #13
Pentaxian
pete-tarmigan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Conception Bay South, New-fun-land
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,216
QuoteOriginally posted by tvdtvdtvd Quote
Perhaps, but the camera is still a very useful tool for capturing all that detail very quickly. Much more quickly
than it could be done to sketch a highly detailed, highly realistic portrait from scratch.
Not if you bought animation software.
04-24-2015, 01:36 PM   #14
Pentaxian
tvdtvdtvd's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,196
QuoteOriginally posted by pete-tarmigan Quote
Not if you bought animation software.
I'll have to take you're word for that as I'm not familiar with animation software in general nor any
software that creates a photo realistic portrait, from scratch, as quickly as snapping the shutter
button on a camera.
04-24-2015, 01:40 PM   #15
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 169
QuoteOriginally posted by zzeitg Quote
From what I can see there... lot of photoshopping... I'm not completly sure that I like this kind of hyper-reality creation. Many times it's impressive, but where is the border between photography and virtual reality (like video game graphics...)?
It's art. Nobody said the point of photography is to make an exact photocopy of real life, or if doing that is somehow 'better' than representing the real world in a different way. Copying is not creative, that's technical.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
photographers, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will K3 do better than K5II for this kind of shot? Shanti Pentax K-3 23 06-05-2014 04:51 PM
What kind of a bag do you have for the airplane cabin? Raffwal Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 11 11-01-2011 08:18 PM
Do most studios have this kind policy? K57XR General Talk 11 05-11-2011 11:08 AM
Is it common to have AF discrepency of this kind?? BBear Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 10-03-2008 06:15 PM
What kind of lenses do I have? deludel Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 03-21-2008 08:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:50 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top