View Single Post
Old 04-10-2016, 02:26 PM   #6
Senior Member
bigiron's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bedford, NH
Posts: 249

Originally Posted by John West View Post
We seem to be entering an era where "over processing" to achieve some kind of artistic effect is acceptable, even desirable. This is not bad, just different. I have done a similar thing when post-processing older underexposed slides, in order to "save" them. For example

Image © John West
PhotoID: 193341
Photograph © John West

In my case I call it the "Ted Rose Effect", because it makes the image look a bit like one of his water colors.

Photoshop and similar apps offer all kinds of options to "improve" images and not surprisingly photogs are finding ways to use them. The effects can be striking. In a way it is little or no different than using backlighting to achieve artistic effects.

But obviously what works and what doesn't is in the eye of the beholder. Some of it I like, some I don't, and some times what is good in small amounts becomes uninteresting when used routinely.

John, I agree to your thoughts somewhat, but in your photo the scene still looks somewhat in it's natural state and you are also dealing with an older slide. I like others, would like to see what the original shot looked like before the editing to give a sense of how much things are being pushed or changed in the processing.

I started the post as it seems we are headed down a new road and because some screeners (maybe one) are letting these go I just wanted to see the followers take on this angle of acceptance. I will add that since some are getting by the possibility of more weird shots crossing the eyes of the screeners will increase and that will be part of the growing pains with others looking for their artsy shots to make the cut.

Also, thanks for showing your picture which I never saw and being a Deere man I like the new/old 2 cylinder tractors being hauled! The money they catch today is rather steep if they are decent.

bigiron is offline   Reply With Quote