Photography 56k no-go zone

[Spindleshanks]

But the very essence of art is creating "something" out of "nothing" that people would admire and add value to. The way I see it, is that digital techniques in creating a film or photo robs the artist of that process, because he/she does it with the help of some company's software.

It makes it cheap. Beacause now everyone can do it.

[Cleric]

The way I see it, is that digital techniques in creating a film or photo robs the artist of that process, because he/she does it with the help of some company's software.

Yeah, like those damn paintbrush companies...

The end product is the art, not the process of creation. Just because the tools are available, doesn't mean it doesn't take artistic skill to properly apply it.

[Spindleshanks]

Yes, but what I'm saying is that these digital "tools" lower the amount of artistic skill required to create something worthwhile.

While, like Onona, there are people who posses the artistic skill to do a bloody smart job on a photo, there are now millions of people who, without much technical effort or experience, can easily match that.

Then comes the other issue of: "My pic looks bettuh than urs, bcuz I haz Adobe 9000 and you only has 6000"

It's bull****. It has become frivolous.

[Cleric]

I suppose I get where you're coming from, and I generally subscribe to the school of thought that most work is done behind the lens, and then tools/post are for cleaning up. But there are people who do things in post that I certainly don't have the skill or artistic vision to do.

[onona]

But the very essence of art is creating "something" out of "nothing" that people would admire and add value to. The way I see it, is that digital techniques in creating a film or photo robs the artist of that process, because he/she does it with the help of some company's software.

Wut.

Without a camera, a photographer couldn't take a photo. Why is it okay to use a camera, but not software? If you want to be a purist, then you have to go back to a pencil and paper. And that pencil should be handmade by the artist, as well as the paper.

It makes it cheap. Beacause now everyone can do it.

Oh really? You can give the most expensive camera and top of the range software and plugins to someone with no skill and they'll produce ****ty images. Fact. Just look at that website that Cleric posted a link to. Don't get so hung up on purist ideals.

[Spindleshanks]

I see your point. I just wanted to state mine.

So I'm a purist - no need to crap bricks because of it.

But yea, ib4 Onona gets me heated I'm done here. It's been a nice discussion.

[ioiiooio]

I think the whole "Digital art has no merit" argument is really shortsighted. I believe many of the greatest artists that ever lived wouldn't have shunned the technology age, but rather embraced it. It opens up new doors for creativity. There will always be those who display remarkable talent, and they are usually the people who have dedicated their lives to their art, just like every other artist before them.

[nukehead]

Software is a tool. How you use said tool is what makes a difference. Sure there are filters and the like which are quick fix one-click 'creative' solutions but it is the creative use of said tools which make the end product enjoyable. Taking a 'vanilla' picture on film without any sort of creative 'exposure techniques' (yeah, I am talking out of my comfort zone) will not necessarily produce a better result than an experienced user of digital. What is currently being debated here, if I can use an analogy, is whether or not an acoustic guitar is 'better' than an electric.

[Toxxyc]

It feels like I stumbled into the wrong thread. This is the "art" debate all over again.

[KFC]

Chances are that you have seen a picture I took on either events/film-sets/gigs lie at 72.5%
Chances that you're in it: 23.2%
Its me job...Dey pay good!
(I take 2000 pics a week, and 400 get uploaded each week)
Not to even mention my "arty" pictures :P

[onona]

I treated myself to yet another extension to my photographic arsenal yesterday, the deliciously retro Fujifilm FinePix x100. This baby is all kinds of awesome.

[onona]

Also, a few new pics from travels over the last year...

Hal?szb?stya in Budapest, Hungary



The Moulin Rouge in Paris, France (yes, the original one!)



Another view across the Seine in Paris (you can just see the two towers of the Notre Dame peeking out on the left)



Warwick Castle in Warwick, England

[wir]

Also, a few new pics from travels over the last year...

Hal?szb?stya in Budapest, Hungary

http://www.flickr.com/photos/onona/6117112349/

Wow, that is an incredible photo. Very, very nice!

[onona]

Thanks Wir! I love that building myself, actually the whole of Budapest is just ****ing awesome.

I took my new x100 out today and shot this on my way home after work. It's this really cool, very dystopian building behind the British Museum in London. I often walk past it and have always admired it so tonight I took a suitably dramatic shot of it.


Dystopia by onona, on Flickr

[Toxxyc]

So, we had one massive hail storm in Pretoria last night. I managed to take a few quick photos before the rain started up again, but here's the best one:

[onona]

Holy **** those are big hailstones O_O

[Toxxyc]

Holy **** those are big hailstones O_O

Hehe they are minute to some of the others I've seen. This guy at my office picked up R20,000 worth of damage on his car, with the size of hailstones he photographed being between golf ball and tennis ball size. The ones we had were about 18mm in diameter, not the largest I've yet had on the lawn :)

[JackB]

Ok

I am looking at getting a camera for myself. I want one that is good for beginner level but will hold up when my skill grows to advanced level.

This is what i have looked at:

Olympus SZ-10
Canon EO S 5D MKII
Canon Powershot SX30 IS
Nikon D3100

Any advise would be appreciated.

[onona]

How did the 5D MkII get into your list? That's a professional level DSLR.

[Grimnebulin]

Ok

I am looking at getting a camera for myself. I want one that is good for beginner level but will hold up when my skill grows to advanced level.

This is what i have looked at:

Olympus SZ-10
Canon EO S 5D MKII
Canon Powershot SX30 IS
Nikon D3100

Any advise would be appreciated.

The Canon 5D MKII is one hell of a lot of camera for a beginner. As a matter of interest, why would you be looking at that particular model? The 550D is much cheaper and is probably all you'll need unless you are considering going professional. You could even look at using the 500D, but if you're keen on filming in HD go for the 550.

I'd avoid the Powershot and the Olympus, you can't really go wrong with Nikon, but for me the 550D is probably best value for money

Edit - Onona's just too quick for me. But yeah, I'm also curious how that ended up on the list.