Nathan Wajsman wrote:
> It is as always a true honor to have one of my images receive the Moose
> treatment--and you have definitely improved it!
>
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it.
I respect and appreciate your artistic paradigm. Indeed, I've learned a
lot of value to me from your diary like, semi journalistic method, both
about technique and about understanding the work of some others.
On the other hand, I'm mostly drinking a different kind of Kool-Aid. And
as Tom mentioned, if HC-B had taken this shot, there would likely have
been a lot of dodging and perhaps a bit of burning in the printing process.
I am at a point in my photography where I often visualize what the image
a subject will look like after post processing. I also have a pretty
good idea what the shot straight from the camera will look like, but the
end result is clearer in my mind's eye.
To me, this is analogous to the pre-visualization of folks like Ansel
Adams, where the image capture, development and printing process as a
whole was all effort toward a pre-visualized end. RAW conversions and
post processing seem to me to be analogous, as process, to development
and printing of film. I don't know if making an analogy between film
negative and RAW image converted without adjustment beyond exposure, is
stretching too far, but with many shots I take, that's how it is for me.
I sure don't claim results in the same league as St. Ansel, but I think
the overall process is one he would recognize once he became familiar
with it.
> Thanks for looking and for taking the time to do this.
>
It was actually a pleasure. Your approval just adds to that.
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|