My wife (and I assume 98% of the rest of the viewing audience) never
sees what I consider technical flaws in my photography. In the sequence
I posted earlier today where the young marine was cutting the yellow
ribbon off the maple tree I didn't realize it was about to happen and
had removed my flash which I was using for fill. The entire scenario
was shot in dense shade with full afternoon sun in the background and
dappling the white house and all the participants.
The lad's grandmother (the lady in the red and white) was anxious to see
the shots immediately after I downloaded the card to my laptop. I was
reluctant to show them since I knew they would need extensive exposure
adjustment in ACR to bring the shadows and highlights into line. I
expressed some reluctance to show the raw images but didn't tell her why
I didn't want to show them yet. But she was so excited and so
persistent I did show them.
As we were going through them all *I* could see was the deep shadows
blotting out everyones features which was competing with the near blown
highlights. All *she* could see was that her grandson was very happy
and beaming from ear to ear on every shot which made her ecstatically
happy. The images I posted today have been exposure corrected as much
as I could. She saw them last night and I don't think she noticed one
bit of difference. She still sees only the smiles.
Chuck Norcutt
Robert Burnette wrote:
>
> The truth be told, most people we show our photos to can't tell the
> difference.
> If it looks good, the preponderance of our clients and friends don't care if
> the
> photo has a little barrel distortion, chromatic aberration, bad bokeh, etc.
> Most
> would not know the difference unless we pointed it out to them. (Didn't each
> of us have to learn what those things were before we started noticing them
> and/or were taught that they are "undesirable?")
>
> I think many photographers tend to shoot and/or print photos seeking the
> approval of other photographers more than to please their clients or
> themselves.
> Haven't we (all) had other photographers pan photos that we personally like?
> Did we change anything because of their opinion? Answer: Often. Point made.
>
> In my experience, many members of photographer lists/clubs are fickle. They
> are chasing the photographic equivalent of the Holy Grail. And so they get
> seduced by the "latest and greatest," spend lots of money on camera bodies,
> lenses, software, etc. and still produce mediocre photographs. In short, "it
> ain't
> just about the equipment, Harvey."
>
> Don't misunderstand, I think we should strive to do the best we can and have
> the tools that meet our needs (but not necessarily our wants). But, we must
> not
> forget that perfection in any field is a seldom obtained goal, a wicked
> taskmaster,
> a prime producer of discontent and a frequent cause of abandoning one's
> dream(s). Rather than set unreachable goals and fail, we should set goals we
> can
> achieve and then as we achieve them set the next goals a bit higher. That way,
> we continue to grow and achieve. But, never, ever denigrate your present
> accomplishments because you haven't reached perfection. As someone once said,
> "If at first you don't succeed, you're running about average." ;o)
>
> What does this have to do with your questions? Not much. Just wanted
> to spout a few personal opinions. Nothing personal intended. It's just that
> list members have gotten so philosophical lately. I couldn't resist. ;o)
>
> Robert
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.24.4/1475 - Release Date: 5/30/2008
> 2:53 PM
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|