I used to practice photography, but I quit for a while after getting burned out, because I was not able to catch exactly what I was seeing at the moment — never same light, never same colors. I know that it is not always about catching exactly the same thing one sees, but it was what I was looking for. For example, could you catch a street lamp at night and not record more or less light than the exact appearance of the moment? Anyway...
I think that many many people who have no idea of the technical side of photography (including me) are taking a lot of black and white stuff, or "abusing" shallow depth of field for effect. People think that this is super-cool, when in reality nowadays it is super-easy to do. Digital technology and post-processing make it so easy — is it cheating (or lame or cheesy) to produce images with these effects when they take no real work?
So, what does it take to make a good photo? Does the technical side matter? Is it possible for an image which is artistically original but technically poor to be a good photograph?
No comments:
Post a Comment