Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-15-2022, 06:05 PM - 2 Likes   #151
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,174
QuoteOriginally posted by h.butz Quote
Those are all good points...

If I put on a pair of yellow tinted sunglasses, I am distorting reality - it's still "real" yet with higher contrast...
Even in a film camera every set of film dyes constitutes a different pair of sunglasses. Some films were extremely easy to identify back in the day just by their color rendering, but even in monochrome there were easily seen diffs between some films.

In a digital camera, various sensor classes and various processing choices built in to the development software constitute different sunglasses.

All cameras "distort" reality just like all brains do. For example there is no such thing as a pure purple in "reality" (as a singular spectral color). It is a construction which occurs in your brain resulting from how your brain processes a combination of wavelengths.


Last edited by jgnfld; 04-15-2022 at 06:17 PM.
04-16-2022, 01:45 AM - 2 Likes   #152
Pentaxian
Dartmoor Dave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dartmoor, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,052
QuoteOriginally posted by h.butz Quote
It's just not the reason I shoot photography.

And that's really the crux of the matter. The reasons why you personally take photos are reasons that make you want your end result to look as close as possible to the scene as you actually saw it. But of course others have got their own reasons for taking photos that are likely to be different.

In fact, think I've actually got a fairly similar view of things to you. I take photos entirely for myself, primarily as a way of capturing a moment that I want to be able to remember, so I'm not usually inclined to process my shots in any way that changes the essential truthiness of them. Meanwhile though, other photographers are doing their own photography for different but equally valid reasons. A photographer who is doing it for a living will always be more interested in producing an end result that somebody is willing to pay for rather than one that's strictly accurate to reality. And a photographer who enjoys entering competitions in genres where extensive processing is the norm, such as contemporary landscape photography, must presumably be quite comfortable with producing an end result that has very little resemble to the scene as it actually looked.

There's no neutral metaphotographic standard for any of us to refer to. There's no set of rules that we can point to and say, "That's it, right there. That's exactly what all photographers must do. Those are the rules that all photographers must follow." The most that any of us can say is, "This is what I happen to like, and this is why I happen to like it."

So to bring it back to the original point of the thread: If I decide that I want to add some background blur to a photo on the computer, and I'm comfortable with doing that because I don't think it alters the truthiness of that particular photo any more than using a lens with a wider aperture would have done, then I'm free to do that and nobody is entitled to tell me not to. It's no different in principle to dodging and burning a B&W print under an enlarger.

Last edited by Dartmoor Dave; 04-16-2022 at 02:04 AM.
04-16-2022, 03:43 AM   #153
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 25,021
QuoteOriginally posted by jgnfld Quote
Even in a film camera every set of film dyes constitutes a different pair of sunglasses. Some films were extremely easy to identify back in the day just by their color rendering, but even in monochrome there were easily seen diffs between some films.

In a digital camera, various sensor classes and various processing choices built in to the development software constitute different sunglasses.

All cameras "distort" reality just like all brains do. For example there is no such thing as a pure purple in "reality" (as a singular spectral color). It is a construction which occurs in your brain resulting from how your brain processes a combination of wavelengths.
I really think a lot comes down to what we are used to doing.

People can get used to anything -- even abdominal pain. In the case of film, people get used to the colors (or black and white responses) of their preferred film. It isn't that the world actually looks anything like what is captured by Kodak T Max or Fuji Provia, but photographers are used to it and know what they are going to get when they click the shutter.

(I am convinced that this is what was beyond much of the angst when digital moved from CCD to CMOS sensors)
5 Days Ago   #154
169
Junior Member




Join Date: Feb 2022
Posts: 25
QuoteOriginally posted by Roland Karlsson Quote
Its like cats and dogs, some people like cats and some like dogs. And some like both. Some do like shallow DOF and some like infinite DOF. And some like both.
I do not mind dogs, but I prefer cats.
I have a relative who loves dogs and hates cats.
I have another relative who always owned cats, then decided they wanted a dog and now does not like cats.
I had a cat who liked dogs but not other cats.
I knew a dog that hated cats and would chase them, and I knew a cat that hated dogs and would chase them.
I knew a farmer that liked cats and dogs, but the dog accompanied him sheep herding which the cat was bad at, so the farmer preferred the dog on that basis.
Then again, I knew a cat that travelled on the bus with his owner and helped him to busk.

Just backing up what you were saying about cats and dogs.

---------- Post added 06-26-22 at 02:15 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
People can get used to anything -- even abdominal pain.
I am not so sure about this.
I have a relative who suffers continual abdominal pain and they are not used to it.
Also, Mike was still troubled by arthritis on page 2.

---------- Post added 06-26-22 at 02:18 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by swanlefitte Quote
As for water a friend did a double-blind taste test and correctly identified 5 brands all refrigerated over night.
I am agreeing with what you are saying about water.
But I knew someone who could not tell the difference between waters and coriander tasted metallic to them.

---------- Post added 06-26-22 at 02:23 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Another member earlier in the thread mentioned fine, fly-away hairs on someone's head... It's a common scenario
I worked with someone once who had this problem. They were old and their hair was very fine, and when you sat behind them you could see the fly-away hairs wavering slightly in convection currents and it was very distracting.

I am agreeing with what you're saying in principle, but I don't know how common a scenario this is. I have only ever known one person like this.

---------- Post added 06-26-22 at 02:34 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by FozzFoster Quote
Ok here me out:
On a bright day, lie on your back on the ground with a ball cap over your face.
With most ball caps, there's little holes on the top of the cap.
I would like to try this but I do not have a ball cap.
I have a relative who collects ball caps. He has ball caps from many countries around the world and they are in his wardrobe. Sometimes he wears them, but mostly they are just for collecting.
I emailed him and he said there were not little holes in the top of most of his caps and so I cannot agree with you.

---------- Post added 06-26-22 at 02:39 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by swanlefitte Quote
I saw a discussion today on why so my photos have blue and orange. "It's a fad."
I do not think it is a fad so I cannot support your statement. But I will not quibble over whether you saw a discussion today and I hope you keep taking blue and orange photos.
I knew a photographer once who took a blue and orange photo and it was nice.

---------- Post added 06-26-22 at 02:44 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
it wouldn't be surprising to find if Vincent Van Gogh had been taking the heart rate control medication based on Digitalis (which makes its first appearance in published medical literature in 1795).
I cannot condone this dangerously untethered propaganda. William Withering's 'An Account of the Foxglove' was first published in 1785. You propose Vincent Van Gogh's grandfather – Vincent Van Gogh – being born AFTER the publication of Withering's pioneering digitalis tome, but it was published four years PRIOR. I therefore cannot get behind your views on bokeh.


Last edited by 169; 5 Days Ago at 02:53 AM.
5 Days Ago   #155
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 568
QuoteOriginally posted by Thwyllo Quote
I mean imagine if Apple partnered to produce a mirrorless camera with this kind of effect capability
Pentax has long ago implemented this on the Q series. It is even available on the mode knob as BC (blur control)
4 Days Ago   #156
Custom User Title
Loyal Site Supporter
FozzFoster's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Alberta
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,208
QuoteOriginally posted by 169 Quote
I emailed him and he said there were not little holes in the top of most of his caps and so I cannot agree with you.
Attached picture with 'holes' in the caps... it's very common
Attached Images
 
4 Days Ago   #157
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 18,509
QuoteOriginally posted by 169 Quote
I have a relative who suffers continual abdominal pain and they are not used to it.
Also, Mike was still troubled by arthritis on page 2.
Thankfully, I am used to it I don't like it, no sir - but I've grown accustomed to it and can usually "zone out" from the typical mild discomfort, such as it is (flare-ups aren't so easily dismissed, though). Amongst other things such as not kneeling for low-angle photos, well-adjusted meds help tremendously

QuoteOriginally posted by 169 Quote
I worked with someone once who had this problem. They were old and their hair was very fine, and when you sat behind them you could see the fly-away hairs wavering slightly in convection currents and it was very distracting.

I am agreeing with what you're saying in principle, but I don't know how common a scenario this is. I have only ever known one person like this.
I've had two girlfriends in the last 10 years with "fly away hair", and my Mum's hair also "suffers" in this respect. I guess a professional portrait photographer would work with a stylist who'd deal with this using hairspray or something similar, but a typical smartphone user taking portraits out in the field wouldn't have that luxury (or would look awfully strange pulling out a can of hairspray and squirting a stranger's head with it ). For them, "fake" bokeh will likely show artefacts and simulated depth-of-field problems around those fly-away hairs - which won't matter for photos destined for social media, but would for anything larger...

4 Days Ago   #158
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Minneapolis
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,879
QuoteOriginally posted by 169 Quote
I do not think it is a fad so I cannot support your statement. But I will not quibble over whether you saw a discussion today and I hope you keep taking blue and orange photos.
I knew a photographer once who took a blue and orange photo and it was nice.
I put "It's a fad" in quotes because many agreed with that statement. I do not think any of those people had enough information to realize color temperature. The fad will last as long as the earth has sunsets.
4 Days Ago   #159
169
Junior Member




Join Date: Feb 2022
Posts: 25
We should talk more about where are the holes in ball hats, and flyaway hair and the two girlfriends with it, and medication and body positions mitigating arthritis pain, and not squirting strangers' heads. I have learned much about these things from this thread. For the general good, can I ask the admin to retitle it:

“A Case Study in the Tendency of Discussions About Bokeh to Devolve: AKA Where are the Holes in Ball Hats, Flyaway Hair and the Two Girlfriends with It, Medication and Body Positions Mitigating Arthritis Pain, Correctly Dating Digitalis Literature, and Not Squirting Strangers' Heads"?

Last edited by 169; 4 Days Ago at 02:44 AM.
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!
amount, aperture, apple, attention, bokeh, camera, cameras, clueless, course, days, defocus, depth, effect, eye, field, focus, hdr, images, lens, lenses, musicians, phones, photography, post, print, quality, subject, telephone, word
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature Another Fake Flower To Go With Fake Media, etc.,etc., Tonytee Post Your Photos! 4 10-09-2017 09:31 PM
Nature It's a Fake. Fake news, Fake Media, Fake Flower. Tonytee Post Your Photos! 1 09-12-2017 04:01 PM
Misc 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR Bokeh Bokeh Bokeh! iocchelli Post Your Photos! 3 03-20-2011 02:22 AM
Have we become too civilized? seacapt General Talk 64 03-24-2010 10:01 AM
We have a White PENTAX K-M! Now we have the Computer Game Adrian Owerko Pentax News and Rumors 8 03-19-2009 05:23 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:25 AM. | 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