Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1665

[P3D B. Schlueter <betty@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Larry wrote:

>Must the photographer always be bound by the moment and circumstance when
>the shutter clicks? Or can the photographer concentrate on intended
>communication and use whatever tools are available to make that clear? In
>3D, you want all the typical characteristics of a good photo as well as
>recognizable spatial relationships that are equally clear and satisfying to
>see. If that can be enhanced by the photographer, it makes for a better
>final image. A better final image does solicit an emotional response or make
>a point, or it isn't a better image. IMHO.   : -)


Bravo! I couldn't have said this better! I believe *all* photographs elicit
some sort of emotional response.

(not sure who wrote this)
> The computer is a much more powerful tool than the darkroom.  The object is
> darkroom manipulation is to improve an original negative.  In a computer,
> an original negative does not need to be prenset.  A computer can create an
> image with real-like objects that are not real, i.e. they never existed in
> real life.  Can a darkroom do this?

Tell Jerry Uelsmann that. I'm sure he would beg to differ.

http://luxurytrim.com/Uelsmann/

Betty
(when I grow up I wanna be like Lincoln)



  ______________________________
   As Ansel Adams once said;
"There is nothing more useless than
a sharp photograph of a fuzzy concept."
http://www.nyiq.net/~homeworld/betty/
  ______________________________




------------------------------