'The Professional Juried Photo Contest'

A well-known and prestigious photo club in the LA area invited me to watch

their photo judging conducted by pro club members and at least one judging

pro. Here is the preliminary selections with various category winners

competing. Your ratings, critiques and observations are invited and most

welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically, or wish to make a remark, please

submit a helpful and constructive comment; please share your photographic

knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! john

Ah, you can see them discussing the finer points of these works--

interesting shot.

Thanks for the comment.

You can also see how heavily edited (Photoshopped) these images are.

Such image editing hardly exited when I took up photography; it was straight photography, and what could be done in the darkroom.  Jerry Uelsman from Rochester perhaps stretched the limits without doing 'digital' more than anyone, and his work is fabulous, but now anyone with Photoshop and training can do pretty stunning work, but 'seeing' an image is harder than 'image editing in most instances, to my mind.  But perhaps I'm just an iconoclast and defending my own past.   Who knows?

Best to you.

John (Crosley)

The one on the left seems the most appealing to me. This image itself would be an interesting contender.

Interesting view and approach John. As always, there is something in your time to shoot that is not available to everyone.

Regards,

ricardo

I am driven as much by these words when posting as anything:

"Keep It Interesting'.

I have various styles, and it's almost impossible not to repeat myself in day to day shooting, but in posting I try to vary it.  

Sometimes I'll keep images for months or years just because they're good (in my judgment) and most of all 'interesting.'

Just last night and over the weekend I processed a gallery-level (very high gallery level) image, that I found among my passed over images -- ones that I didn't even see, or if I had seen it, it had a defect that only today's newly acquired Photoshop skills now allows me to cure, though it was not now a major process -- five years ago, it would have to have been 'farmed out' to be possibly good, with no guarantees, and I didn't even know then.

Now I have a better eye and better image editing skills plus Photoshop has a host of GREAT new features that speed up image editing and take much of the drudge out of it.

I have hundreds -- maybe over a thousand downloads, I haven't reviewed with my newly-trained eye, so keep looking.

There may be something more you like that I previously passed over.

;~))

john

John (Crosley)

John,

Re; photoshopping of everything. There is someone in our state who likes to digitally colorize trees in forests shots- you know, blues, neon reds,yellows etc. He was a big hit for awhile. Personally, these do not impress me. Just because someone can alter a shot by employing a "filter" or other is not art, imo. Much rather see an exceptional shot of true nature exhibiting something unique- light, atmosphere, you know.and well done. The other is ok, but I think it ought to be in a category by itself - digital manipulation?- rather than lumped in with photography. Photo shop is excellent to help overcome short comings in camera technology or difficult circumstances for an otherwise interesting capture. Just my 2 cents.

G

It would not be malpractice for an author to publish a manuscript without haviung it edited, and for a professional level photo, maybe the same applies, at least through the use of pro level image editing tools, although no one but the photographer him or herself need use those tools.

I am of the 'keep if simple' school which eschews bright colors for the sake of bright colors and over image editing everything just because it cam be done.  HDR is one example where image editing often defeats the purpose and subsumes the intent of the photographer in capturing 'nature' for instance, but I'm only once voice out of millions; and no one can substitute my personal tastes for their own aesthetic.

FYI, the world's most expensive photographer heavily photoshops his images, but that proves nothing exept that he does that, not that they're better or more worthy -- just that people with money to spend are willing to pay more for such images by him.

Aside from that, no real lesson at all.

I'l just plod on.  

I like my way; it's my personal choice.

Best to both of you.

john

John (Crosley)