Originally posted by ivoire I suspect that traditional artists saw the invention of the camera/photography in a similar light... and they probably made similar comments about the brushes, palette knives and paints as well. Now it is all an accepted art form. A tool is a tool... it either is useful to you or not
Yes, exactly. And that's why I say they are digital paintings. A new category of art. The photographer back then didn't call his photograph a painting and the painter didn't call their work a photograph. Today, you take the an image and go, hum, the blue is not blue enough. There fixed that. Oh, darn, I wasn't at the right place at the right time to capture that beautiful orange on those Canyon walls. There, fixed that. And oh those tree leaves would look much better yellow than light green. No problem, fixed that too.
I say there is nothing wrong with it. It is a work of art. But don't manipulate the light wave lengths captured by the camera or introduce new, unrecored light wave lengths and then pass it off as a photograph then say look at the beautiful moment in nature I captured is all when in reality you created it.
Granted, there is interpretation just like an analog print made from a negative. But what we are seeing today has taken it way past minor tone interpretations to all-out fabrications. Digital paintings, in other words.
Last edited by tuco; 09-09-2009 at 10:35 AM.