Images of Canberra - Thunder over Mount Ainslie

I think you are ALL pretty brilliant. I mean, you could easily be sitting at home, scratching your bottoms while watching the New Price is Right. But you’re not. You’re out there DOING SOMETHING – that is creative and interesting and, well, just well done!

SkipDaRoo said :

To the comment re Pommy Bastards fine photos, betya anything that he uses more photoshop in his photos than this did, this is simply a merge, Pommy because he takes one photo has to correct white balance, exposure etc

I don’t know how you would quantify “more photoshop” in this instance, but I’ll happily admit to doing post-processing on my images until I am satisfied with them. It’s the modern darkroom.

Ultimately though, each to their own.

Agreed.

For the record, I have been doing HRD equivalent on black and white prints since 1992 with dodging and burining in a dark room environment.

SkipDaRoo – regardless of what can be read in a book, a photo IMO is something I look at and it reflects how I would see the scene in real life. No amount of reading books will change my opinion. The link that was provided to one of the original pictures was how I would have seen it being a photo.

In my opinion (I Dont want to debate my opinion, you have yours, I have mine) as soon as you take away or add to what your eye sees naturally, its no longer accurately called a photo – it is a composition.

I paint with light at night time, google danman and riotact if you wanna see any – these are compostions or art, when I go out and do wedding/rallies/sports/live music events, these are photos.

In my opinion (Once again I have an opinion and so do you, they may not be the same but meh) a photo should reflect accurately what you would see if you were there at the time of the photo being taken. If I saw this exact scene, with this same lighting and detail elements as displayed in the photo, I would be worried that the time of purification was at hand.

Lots of my photos are similar in that I create a scene whilst taking the photo, instead of after, and fall into light painting/art genres. HDR is the same, its art not photography.

If you have to heavily manipulate the scene, in order to dramatically change elements during or post photograph then its art, though I know the whole HRD is photography debate will grind on regardless of my opinion, just like bokeh or depth of field ?

None the less, HDR can have dramatic effects when its not too overly done, and can look shoking and comical when it is.

Fantastic!

s-s-a said :

I agree with #3. Too much Photoshop makes it a dramatic piece of art, not a photo IMO. Would be interested to see one of the component images SOOC?

It is not art, it is 3 or 5 photos merged together.
Have a read of some of ansel adams books some of his signature photos had over 30 different elements various dodge and burns.

Basically perfect exposure as dictated by the camera will be one of the photos. And then 1 or 2 over exposed and 1 or 2 under exposed which will give details on those light washed out objects and those dark objects lacking details.

The HDR program grabs the detail form the 5 pictures and basically shows the extremes,
It is an excellent photo.
To the comment re Pommy Bastards fine photos, betya anything that he uses more photoshop in his photos than this did, this is simply a merge, Pommy because he takes one photo has to correct white balance, exposure etc

Ultimately though, each to their own.

“Too much Photoshop makes it a dramatic piece of art, not a photo IMO.”

So a photo is a pure and unaffected representation of reality? That’s just not the case – all photos involve human selection and manipulation, Photoshop just makes it more obvious.

You can see a shot straight out of the camera at 0EV here: http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=xhjriwewwzw&thumb=5

This is what the camera thinks it should be exposed at. You just can’t get all the highlight detail in one shot.

that’s just amazing. I can see it’s been fiddled with, big-time, but it’s so well done and adds to the drama of the shot. The folk at Weatherzone will love this.

I agree with #3. Too much Photoshop makes it a dramatic piece of art, not a photo IMO. Would be interested to see one of the component images SOOC?