Photomanipulation section in the gallery

[turvas]

The public yearns for a photomanipulation section in the gallery, Manic!
The public demands it, Stripes!

This is my

Originally Posted by supertackyman

we should gang up on man1c and ask for one

topic.

//Edit: The quote is from Alone at Sunset - BioRUST.com :: User Gallery

[tamlin]

Why not just rename the Photography Gallery to Photography and Photomanipulation (the same as the forum)?

After all, I suspect that the majority of the images posted in Photography have been "manipulated" in one way or another - even if it's just sharpening and contrast tweaking. I know mine have.

[supertackyman]

although the line can be subtle at times between photographic correction/adjustment and manipulation, there is a distinct diference between "look at what i saw" and "look at what i made"

the more we are willing to consider manipulation a'la photoshop as actual photography. the less believeable the art of true photography will become.

I wouldnt consider rubber stamping away stray reflections or small flaws, nor healing away that stray coke can that is marring the pristine beauty of an otherwise clean shot manipulation. that would fall under corrections and post shot editing.

im thinking about manipulation being the importation of multiple elements and combining them into one image.

I recall some stink a while back involving some Reuters "photographs" in the news

that said, I want to work for "the weekly world news" or some other yellow newspaper, have you seen the manip quailty there? its like they use photocopies and razorblades.


may we have a manipulation gallery Man1c?

[unleash]

I must agree with turvas and supertacky!

photomanipulation is something competely different than touch-ups....

and why dont have an photomanip gallery part? We have a part for almost every single thing(textures, print media, photography...) So why not?

Manic, the crowd indeed demands a photomanipulation gallery!!

[tamlin]

Well (just to be awkward) I totally disagree.

The whole notion of "manipulating" images goes back to the very beginnings of photography and has been inseparable from it ever since. Even the relatively "simple" process of traditional black & white darkroom development and printing can involve "manipulation" of one sort or another, from techniques like dodging & burning through to colour toning and solarization. I know, because I used to do it myself. How do you classify Henry Fox Talbot's calotypes, Anna Atkins's cyanotypes or Man Ray's "Rayograms"? - all "photographs", but produced without the aid of a camera. How about the gum bichromate prints of Robert Demachy or Constant Puyo, who did not regard "straight" photographs as Art, so manipulated the gum arabic coating of their photographic paper to emulate traditional painting? How about Les Krims and his scraped polaroids, or Jack Perno and Kathleen Carr's polaroid emulsion lifts? Even a bunch of snaps that you took with a disposable camera and had developed at the local One Hour Photo have been "manipulated" in some respect. And this is all before we even enter the realm of digital photography and Photoshop.

Some people can't even manage to post in the correct Gallery as it is - give 'em even more choice (especially something as subjective as this) and the situation will be even worse. And who has to clear up the mess? The Janitor, of course.

Sorry for the rant, but that's the way I see it. Don't do it, M0g - just rename the existing one!

[supertackyman]

dont apologize Tamlin, you make some very good points.
heck, even lens choice could be considered manipulation.

how bout "photoshop decepitons"

[tamlin]

Originally Posted by supertackyman

even lens choice could be considered manipulation.

You could take it even further: The other day I was wanting to photograph a particular gravestone from a certain angle, but there was a small branch from a nearby bush intruding into the shot and spoiling the composition. So what did I do?

Take the photo anyway and then clone out the branch in Photoshop?

Nah - I just broke the branch off before taking the photo. That's what I call "photomanipulation" before you even click the shutter...

[stiney51]

Way to go tamlin... abuse the poor bush that didn't do anything to you. You make me sick.

lol

[tamlin]

Originally Posted by stiney51

Way to go tamlin... abuse the poor bush that didn't do anything to you. You make me sick.

lol

You should see what I did to the fluffy kitten that strayed into one of my shots the other day...

[Man1c M0g]

Hmmmm. How about we create a poll to decide this matter? Winner takes all...

[tamlin]

Originally Posted by Man1c M0g

Hmmmm. How about we create a poll to decide this matter? Winner takes all...

OK, I've done it...I'm all for democracy.

[turvas]

How... DARE YOU?! You infidel! How dare You add polls to my topics!
And especially with such boring voting options!
Make your own topics if You want to be democratic!

[tamlin]

Originally Posted by turvas

How dare You add polls to my topics!

I'm a SuperMod and I do what I like. Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Originally Posted by turvas

Make your own topics if You want to be democratic!

I notice you still voted in this poll, though!

Sorry, I forgot one other choice:

• Buy turvas a camera so he can take his own photographs

[supertackyman]

Originally Posted by tamlin

[*]Buy turvas a camera so he can take his own photographs

OH, BURN!

nice shot Tamlin!

[MoodsR4Cattle]

Would this be considered a Photo or a Photo Manipulation?

I don't think something like this belongs in the Photography gallery, but in it's own manipulation gallery. The difference between a photo and photo manipulation (IMHO) is more than blurring, color correction, or even a photoshop filter ... but changing the subject of the image completely by including objects from another photo or by removing objects in the original photo ... etc.