howard_creech1

I don't see what all the misunderstanding is about, it seems pretty simple to me, photography is an art form (the pictures from walmart don't really apply is this context) in which a negative or slide is created at a certain moment in time and at a certain place with a camera by a photographer. Digital manipulations don't fall into this category simply because they were created not with a camera, but with a computer. Cameras "see" and record an image as directed by the photographer, the moment, conditions/environment, and creativity. Computers on the other hand create images electronically, they don't "see" they remember what was seen by another medium. Like Bob's example of the eagle/sunrise/rainbow/full moon/waterfall shot....the photographer never "saw" this image, he created it from many other images. I have seen photographers take a walmart shot, add elements from their clip art files and state that thhis image was "created" by them. I can't find any fault with that attitude, unless they claim the the resulting image is a photograph. It clearly is not. I see nothing wrong with creating images with the computer, actually I think it is rather neat. However, when the creator of such an image calls it a photograph, then I have a problem. If you make photographs, then you use a camera to create them...Tomothy O'Sullivan, Eliot Porter, Ansel Adams, David Muench, et al certainly "worked" at improving the images they made (and make) but they did not do so sitting in front of a monitor. The way I see this whole business is that many people can't decide whether they want to be photographers or computer imagers....they want to make images with photoshop and clip art files, but they want their creations to be compared equally with the work of photographers who achieved their images with hard work, skill, and patience. The two are not the same, The best comparison that I can come up with is the guys who manufacture indian artifacts (arrowheads, axes, ceremonial pieces, etc.) with drills and polishers, yet they want them compared favorably to the skilled artisan who worked stone with stone. One idea is clearly art, and the other is clearly plaigarism. If you make it with a computer, it may be art, but it is not a photograph.

Jackie, a friend and I started a camera club from scratch. It is really a lot of work, but if you are interested email me and I will provide some experiences and suggestions. Good luck.