Originally posted by RAZZPhotographic Wow!! I am soo with you on this Fl_Gulfer,
"They are great works, #4 to me is too much and didn't look real. I'm in to the true looking photo. Play with in too much on a computor and you take away the life of the photo."
I'll be behind you waiting for that same shot!!
That is a tough one. For visual impact I really was really wowed by #4. I knew it was not a straight shot, but then again, back in the
old days we did an awful lot in the darkroom to "adjust" the print (and negative too) to what was seen in the mind's eye as the exposure was being made. I can remember using the heat from my finger tips to enhance the development of different regions of a print by touching the paper in the bath. The only straight prints were the ones you got from the drug store.
Having said that, when you drill into the exif data to expose the photoshop history and see just how much labor went into the rendition of the #4, you have to admit that the results are pretty heavily manipulated.