/p/ - Photography » Thread #4116273

[27 / 3 / 28]

Why isn't accuracy held in high regard?

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 01:42:57 No.4116273 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>4116275 >>4116281 >>4116290 >>4116366 >>4116414 >>4116441 >>4116672 >>4116675 >>4116677 >>4116733 >>4116832 >>4116973 >>4116978 >>4117000

Shouldn't photography be about showing something as it was? There is an entire generation of photographers that thinks pulling on some sliders makes them good photographers for some reason. I've always felt like an accurate representation of what your eyes see is what should be aimed for. Am i wrong in thinking this way?

It's like
>OOOOH LOOK AT WHAT AN AMAZING ARTIST I AM BY MAKING THIS RANDOM PHOTO I TOOK OF AN URBAN SETTING ALMOST COMPLETELY DARK WOOOOOHH GIVE ME UPVOTES PLZ.
or:
>HEY LOOK AT THIS BIRD I SHOT WITH MY TELEPHOTO AND USED TOPAZ AI TO MAKE IT LOOK SMOOV

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 01:45:50 No.4116275 Report

Quoted By: >>4116280

>>4116273
>implying Ansel Adams didn't spend more time tweaking a picture in the darkroom than he did setting up and taking the shot
whew, lad

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 01:59:36 No.4116280 Report

Quoted By: >>4116466 >>4116485

>>4116275
Lol I was gonna mention him
Anon I think it’s sort of, and I’m trying my best not to sound pretentious, but about capturing a feeling mixed with making a good picture. Like if people color grade an image to be more warm toned to sort of show how it felt when they were there. I think part of the reason a lot of photos seem bland is because they have a bad balance of the two. You can have a perfectly edited picture but if it’s a bad composition it’s gonna suck. And you can have a great composition but if it doesn’t actually stand out and draw the viewer to look at it, then it also is kind of bad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 01:59:56 No.4116281 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
because photographer want to feel like they added something to a scene when all they do is screw it up

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 02:56:47 No.4116290 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
I do personally strive for realism in my photography but I can admit that my most popular photos online have elements of the surreal in them in terms of colours, perspectives or subject. People are rarely impressed by the banal even if technically well-composed and shot. My compromise is posting my realistic if not banal shots at a 1:1 ratio with the more dramatic/manufactured ones.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 03:08:42 No.4116296 Report

Quoted By: >>4116547

Because people don't want to see something any retard can see on google maps.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 07:18:57 No.4116366 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
>Am i wrong in thinking this way?
Yes. It's very unlikely that I want the same result out of a photo that you want.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 11:09:40 No.4116414 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
sometimes it is about showing something "as it was" or as close to it as your perception can allow. sometimes it is about using place or environment as a base for an image and expanding on it, taking it further than the seen-reality. personally, i try to be a mirror while making pictures. how would this building see itself, if it could perceive it's own reflection? something else i think about is visual averaging - how do the many, many people moving through this square or down this block see it? i try to make an average, yet aesthetically idealized version of the typical personal experience of seeing/moving through a space. if you want "as it was" but also comfy, pleasing pictures, look into new topographics. maybe even the bechers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 14:02:32 No.4116441 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
The reason is, because the practical application of photography is journalism. The core of journalism is selling a story, quite literally. As long as the story sells it doesn't matter what the fuck it's about. Photojournalism is storytelling in visual form, so the pictures are made to look interesting, no matter how warped or recolored, no matter how setup or outright constructed.

I'm not a journalist, and I don't pimp my photos to others. I take what I like for a sense of accomplishment and to remember what used to be once I'm old.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 16:29:22 No.4116466 Report

Quoted By: >>4116523

>>4116280
capture a thing as it is, you are a documentarian of some type. or, use a camera to render an image of your own imagining and you are a type of artist. pick one, pick both, just quit fucking complaining about what others are doing with their own cameras. it is not complicated. would you gripe about someone using a pencil to write instead of using it to draw?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 18:32:02 No.4116485 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116280
>color grade

zoomer filter

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 19:59:43 No.4116523 Report

Quoted By: >>4116541

>>4116466
I’m not complaining I’m just trying to answer OPs question.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 21:05:58 No.4116541 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116523
sorry, was aimed at OP

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Dec 2022 21:28:37 No.4116547 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116296
Holy fucking cope.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Dec 2022 09:15:31 No.4116672 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
>Shouldn't photography be about showing something as it was?
Sometimes. It all depends on the brief, what the function of the image is intended to be. There is no one size fits all answer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Dec 2022 09:40:06 No.4116675 Report

Quoted By: >>4117000

>>4116273

Because every single thing has been photographed a billion times already. What else are people going to do?

And we already both know the answer, they will just keep taking the exact same photos, billions of sunsets, billions of birds, billions of streets, billions of photos of sydney opera house or the harbour bridge. They will keep posting them online too.

There really is nowhere left to go but start fucking around in editing to stand out. This is the curse of the generic photo taker, if you cant be bothered to do anything but that which has already been done a billion times, you are going to need to put in huge photoshop hours to try and make anyone care about a photo they have already seen thousands of times in their life.

Its why flickr groups are so comfy, people just post all sorts of random shit without chasing likes so you actually see a mix of stuff unlike instagram where its just endlessly the same shit over and over.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Dec 2022 09:55:52 No.4116677 Report

Quoted By: >>4116731

>>4116273
>The only good paintings are those that are photo realistic, also I have unbridled autism and my brain simply can't comprehend creativity or the visual appeal of a well theorised colour palette or the eyes journey through an image.

Don't project your neurodivergence anon, it's cringe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Dec 2022 14:38:29 No.4116731 Report

Quoted By: >>4116835

>>4116677
Anyone can pull on a couple of sliders in lightroom.. taking interesting pictures on the other hand..

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Dec 2022 14:55:29 No.4116733 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
Photo realism is too easy to be a good photographer you must capture what seems unreal but is real. Rarity and degree of difficulty matter greatly. Dangerous, low probability of occurrence, oddity etc. merely capturing what is ; is not interesting unless the subject is also the patron because even though people are ordinary people are fascinated with themselves

Art_repro_fag22

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Abstract_9037.jpg, 3MiB, 3832x4790

Art_repro_fag22 Tue 27 Dec 2022 18:36:26 No.4116832 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
In my line of work, it is. In practice, accuracy is very difficult to achieve. Color accuracy, especially when trying to reproduce artwork, is high perceptual, meaning it depends on factors other than the objective SPDs of the various colors in the art. Metamerism is especially hard to deal with since digital sensors have the best color response under D50, but most art galleries use Tungsten like LED lighting. The reproduction looks very nice under D50 studio lighting, but very different in the gallery next the original.
More generally, while tricky, reproducing artwork can be done, especially for certain easy mediums(watercolor, charcoal, graphite, subtractive trad prints), its basically impossible for anything else. Forget prints, even the best screens can't match the dynamic range or saturation of real scenes. We can reproduce the relative differences of tone and color pretty well, but calibration of the capture workflow is very difficult and why artists pay me the big bucks to capture artwork.
Photography and art in general isn't "about" anything. Its just a tool for creative expression. My own art centers around the play between the objective scene in front of the camera and the simplicity of the composition. It creates this interesting of feeling of knowing that the photo is real, but unsure what it is. While you might be able to pin down that its a building, it becomes wholly unfamiliar. That is interesting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Dec 2022 18:38:32 No.4116835 Report

Quoted By: >>4116839 >>4116849

>>4116731
anyone can do photorealistic painting with a little practice, painting interesting pictures on the other hand...

45% of the art of a photography is composition
45% is editing
10% is subject matter

cinefag

cinefag Tue 27 Dec 2022 18:46:09 No.4116839 Report

Quoted By: >>4116849 >>4116931

>>4116835
When it comes to art photography 90% is scene control. Everything else takes a backseat.
And if you're controlling nothing, you're not doing art. You're a glorified CCTV camera.

Art_repro_fag22

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO White, grey, blue.jpg, 836KiB, 3443x3442

Art_repro_fag22 Tue 27 Dec 2022 19:12:29 No.4116849 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116835
>anyone can do photorealistic painting with a little practice, painting interesting pictures on the other hand...
It a lot harder than you think anon.
>>4116839
>When it comes to art photography 90% is scene control.
This is total bs. For my own work, I have very little scene control. I use natural light and photograph stuff as is. The only thing I have control over is the composition, edit and print.

studiomanagerfag

studiomanagerfag Tue 27 Dec 2022 23:52:47 No.4116931 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116839
stop projecting your cine bullshit. you are the cctv camera no-photo-mega-phaggot

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Dec 2022 04:49:26 No.4116973 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116273
I usually try to make the photo as accurate to what I see as possible, mainly because the reason I take photos is to capture memories.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Dec 2022 05:06:36 No.4116978 Report

Quoted By: >>4117000

>>4116273
There are 2 types of photography:

Journalistic

Artistic

the only thing differentiating the 2 is where you draw the line on editing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Dec 2022 06:11:42 No.4117000 Report

Quoted By:

>>4116978
i think it goes even beyond editing. wouldn't you say the two can diverge in approach entirely?
for example what to include in frame, exposure, depth of field, shutter speed, even filters will all have different choices depending on where you want to be between expository vs stylized
>>4116273
technical accuracy/precision can be impressive, but for most people it's not very interesting because it doesn't evoke an emotional response. which i think is why people say that type of photography is not art...
like >>4116675 was getting at, if all you want is the most accurate image of something possible, then a single person will take that pic and all following and preceding pics will become strictly inferior and there's nothing more to be said regarding that subject.
one of the more compelling things imo about humans is the differences in their individual viewpoints and expression even about the same subject. therefore i find the creator's personal vision more important than their ability to capture something true to life.
also, why would you be against denoising software? it's not like our eyes see noise irl

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Why isn't accuracy held in high regard?