Purism

[Graham_of_Rainham]

I have been reading several different views on “purism photography”, many of which decry not only the images but also the people who aspire to produce pictures without the use of post processing.

Most of my photography was done with slide film, which apart from masking and aligning in a mount was about as pure as you can get. Lately I’ve been using my iPhone images and those taken with the cameras full auto mode, far more often without any processing, but still I crop (often to square format) and align where desired.

When I worked in a studio, the aim was to get the image as wanted in the camera, using meters to get the lighting as required and even using a Polaroid back to check the results were as required. Now with tethered shooting, we can see instantly what we will get.

I appreciate the power of post processing and the skill of those that can manipulate an image to achieve their desired objectives. This too is akin to my handing over negatives to a printer, who would work their “darkroom magic” to deliver prints that were superior to my attempts... Now I can see everything happening before my eyes in post processing, I can, debatably, improve my pictures.

Something I have commented on previously, is the attribution of the cameras used in exhibition pictures, when there is never any mention of the post processing software used. I really wonder how anyone can attribute an image to a certain camera, when the end result has been through several different system of processing. The latest thread on Topaz de-noise, added to my thoughts on this, as I had a look at their website and saw they even have a jpg to RAW converter...

When the end result becomes so far removed from the beginning, and the purists are dismissed, have we followed the path of illusion into the world of the truth being what we make it...

[MJ224]

Yea, its the message rather than the messenger that's important to me. Others may prefer it the other way round...no problem..:-))

[wornish]

The world of digital photography is just different to film, not better not worse just different. In the end, its image that matters to me.

In the days of film, I sent off my exposed films to the chemist to get them processed then waited days for the prints to come back only to find most were rubbish. These days I can see straight away if a shot is rubbish and simply delete it and take another till I get one I like. The cost of doing that is zero. Professional photographers in the film days did have a skill they learned after making lots of mistakes, thats what people paid them for. These days I really don't know how a professional photographer makes a living tbh.

[Graham_of_Rainham]

I remember well a David Bailey quote “PhotoShop can make a poor quality image average and a good quality image average”

I often say that I am only interested in the picture that I am looking at and not that interested in how it was produced, however I am also seeing more and more images that are simply “larger than life” with far to much saturation, over sharpened and processed well beyond anything that looks “natural”

While I cannot consider myself a purist, I am far more a “minimalist”, preferring to see pictures that look natural.

Having said that I really like to see pictures that are different and that includes the vastly over processing to produce “artistic” and otherworldly images.

[moggi1964]

I think I am closer to minimalist as well, GoR.

I want to have the image reflect what I saw but sometimes I get the settings wrong and it is over or underexposed; the jpg reflects that. I'm happy to use software to try to bring out what is in the data already to get as close to what I saw as possible. Sometimes I'll emphasise something in the image with some software. Sometimes I play with the arty idea just for fun. I'm not sure where I stand on replacing whole backgrounds unless it is presented as an artistic representation yet I have a picture that I would like to remove a couple of people from it to help better tell the story. I suppose the latter would remain more natural than the former but still, am I being hypocritical?

Here is an example of what I am speaking about: the first image is SOOC; the second is the Raw cropped then a single button process in Aurora HDR to enhance the orange jacket and bring out the darkening skies before converting to jpg (this is the one I would like to remove the dad and kid on the path). His jacket really was a vivid orange and not the muted orange in the first image and the skies really did look a bit threatening. I'm sure there is lots more I could do to get a 'better' image yet this is what the scene looked like to me.

[MJ224]

The skies in the 2nd photo are good, but I suspect the foreground and that Orange jacket is a little over cooked. The SOOC looks better, and I would not mind the sky being brought out a bit...
(IMHO)

[Graham_of_Rainham]

I agree. The second image is a very good example of my comments

[moggi1964]

The skies in the 2nd photo are good, but I suspect the foreground and that Orange jacket is a little over cooked. The SOOC looks better, and I would not mind the sky being brought out a bit...
(IMHO)

Thanks for your thoughts, chaps.
I do agree that the second image is over-HDR'd and yet I know that it is a lot closer to reality than the first and yet still not reality

If I could take out the 'HDR look' but still keep the skies and the pop of the jacket (which was a bizarrely vivid orange) then I would probably achieve image nirvana but I can't be ars*d to achieve that level of detail (which probably involves layers and masking and other things I don't know how to do) so I'll live with the HDR effect.

I would still like to get rid of the dad and kid mind you

[moggi1964]

I thought it might be interesting to leave out the HDR effect and just play with highlights, shadow, exposure and contrast in Affinity Photo. So nothing 'extreme' to a minimalist

I prefer the sky in the HDR one but otherwise this is pretty close and that jacket is STILL bright

Anyway, no more images from me after this one as I have kinda drifted from the spirit of the OP I think.

[Graham_of_Rainham]

That sky looks really threatening for a storm