Am I really that bad of a photographer?

<p>Oh Brad .... how could you? ... I will never be able to write 'Great Capture ' again :-)</p>

<p>You can still write <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/689610@N23/">"Well seen!"</a> It's not completely used up.</p>

<p>JC......I can't wait until I get a good editing program (and learn how to use it). I'm waiting because the photo school I plan to attend requires both Lightroom and CS6......at least they DID. Who knows when a newer version will come out, and they always require the latest version. So I'm waiting a few more months to purchase something. The school starts in June.</p>

<p>As for editing......we should start another thread on this subject. But I got to thinking, and of course I came up with another musical analogy. In my business we make edits all the time. And we do call them 'edits'. They include things like accidentals (note changes), dynamics, rhythmical adjustments, pregnant pauses, major tempi changes not indicated in the original score, and on and on. Wouldn't these be akin to the little changes we make while processing an image? Hence edits? I think it's a fine distinction between the terms 'editing' and 'processing', and I guess I would not nit-pick it too much.</p>

<p>That musical analogy suits final preparation of a photograph very well. I don't think it matters whether we call it darkroom print manipulation, digital editing or processing, the goal is the same: to achieve a final result that fulfills our vision of what we wanted the photograph to be.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It's gets you thinking though doesn't it?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I don't need to be told when, and what, to think</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Isn't that the point of going to an art gallery that it's an ideas factory and gives the imagination a workout? </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>No, the point is to see and appreciate <em>art</em>, not to be "challenged" (which means precisely <em>nothing - </em>it's nothing more or less than a pseud's justification for the existence of tat) by pretentious, meaningless, talentless non-art.</p>

<p>Keith: " 'challenged' (which means precisely <em>nothing - </em>it's nothing more or less than a pseud's justification for the existence of tat) by pretentious, meaningless,<br /> talentless non-art."</p>

<p>_______________________________________________________</p>

<p>Two definitions of "challenge". The first, perhaps, is more relevant to Internet chat rooms and the second, perhaps, is more relevant to museums of art.</p>

<p>1) A call to engage in a contest, fight, or competition.</p>

<p>2) A test of one's abilities or resources in a demanding but stimulating undertaking.</p>

<p>Conclusion: Keith can get much more our of his visits to art galleries, than what is the case for the moment. An appropriate ending of a very long discussion starting with the question: "Am I really that bad of (sic!) a photographer".</p>

>>> No, the point is to see and appreciate art, not to be "challenged" (which means precisely nothing - it's

nothing more or less than a pseud's justification for the existence of tat) by pretentious, meaningless,

talentless non-art.

 

Hmmm... I suppose some of the exhibitions I've seen over the years where I've gone back multiple times

due to being challenged and wanting to come away with a better understanding, might suggest (to some)

the work by Arbus, Frank, Picasso, Rauschenberg, Bischoff, and Avedon (among others) is pretentious,

meaningless, and tasteless non-art.

 

If there were only some (for example) birds-in-flight photos/paintings in the above sets, I probably could have saved a lot of time

understanding the work on first pass and not dealing with the hassle of multiple visits...

<p>Being inquisitive is an artists best friend.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"A wealthy benefactor <del>Being inquisitive</del> is an artists best friend."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Fixed that for ya.</p>

 

<p> </p>

<p>If you don't want to spend money I suggest that you download GIMP which is quite similar to Photoshop and get started, you cannot start too soon.<br />The school must think its students aim to become professional and join the graphics industry otherwise they would not specify PS becuase though I did have a couple of versions of PS... 7 and CS I didn't like them and reverted to what I started with which is Paint Shop Pro becuase PS was too expensive for me originally. <br />If you aim to simply work for yourself as an adjunct to music there is no reason why PSP should not meet your needs and for instance I bought a boxed copy of PSPx3 when PSPx5 was 'the latest and I had x4 in my desktop, I wanted a programme for my notebook. It cost me $15 plus P&P on Amazon and when I compared it with x4 I could find no major differences. [ Funny thing it cost me $60 to get somebody to put it onto the notebook which doesn't have a CD/DVD slot :-( ]<br />However in your position I would suggest you get either an old copy perhaps 'open boxed' or an earlier version 'sealed box' of Adobe Elements [ v8 or later ] and get stuck in becuase much of editing is common sense appreciation of what you see happening on the screen as you adjust controls. You cannot start too soon. The school will teach you their prefered MO system and wrinkles the tutor knows.<br />I appreciate that as a student you will be able to get a cutprice version which does alter things.<br />I do now have PSPx6 [ the latest ] and it is very similar to my earlier versions [ 4 off ] except they have added a very useful tool which delights me. But it is v8 since they added something of real value previously. In fact they changed something which seriously limited me with x4 in making panoramas and I go back to v8 to do them :-)<br />These programmes have reached the stage where all they can do is add small tweaks and a result is Adobe decided to go Cloud to keep up the money stream rather than try and sell another newer version.<br />I think you will find that Adobe Cloud is the successor to CS6 and that is a weekly fee whether you use it or not.</p>

<p>Ha! No smoke without fire Lex ;)</p>

Christal, think of post processing as interpreting a piece of music differently. Maybe in one performance you'll slow down

the tempo to exaggerate drama. Another performance will be more peppy. In a third, you might exaggerate rhythms and

accents. Or you might rework the phrasing of some melodic passages.

 

Assume that the composer is deceased and that we have no recording of his exact interpretation. We have only the

score. That score is your raw file. You now interpret the score to match your performance style,

 

I would encourage you to download the free trial version of Lightroom. It's not gouge to change very much between now

and June. If you had to study a new instrument in June,would you want to walk into the classroom cold, i.e. having never

played it before? Or would you want to get a head start?