Re: [photo-3d] Accuracy Debate

["Don Lopp" <dlopp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

oleg, remember the slides I showed you that had the false blue sky , that is
the way I fight sky polution. Don.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oleg Vorobyoff" <olegv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 8:08 AM
Subject: [photo-3d] Accuracy Debate


> Paul Talbot wrote:
> >Not to start a huge philosophical debate, but as an aspiring
> >artist I'm more concerned with pleasing colors than accurate
> >colors.
>
> I'll bet the accuracy versus pleasantness debate began with the first
> photograph ever taken.  But I think it is worth having since it cuts to
the
> essence of photography.  I have no problem with photography openly being
> used as a tool in the production of works of art.  What distinguishes
> photography from other arts, however, is its documentary capability.  A
> useful document must have credibility.  To maximize credibility, every
> effort should be made to keep it accurate.  So it bothers me when a
> photograph rings false.
>
> >In most of my pictures, that's what I want to see, not the
> >disgusting grey that man and his machines and his pollution
> >have made most of today's skies.  Kodachrome gives me the ugly
> >skies I see almost everyday when I go outside, and I just don't
> >need to see that ugliness in my photos.
>
> True, beauty is becoming scarce.  That makes it all the more valuable.
> The photographer me wants to record beauty, not create it.  The
> process I like to use is more one of recognition than of manipulation.
> I avoid taking any picture until something I see in my viewfinder looks
> truly beautiful.  Then I full well want to see on the slide what I saw in
> the viewfinder.
>
> >Furthermore, no film can come close to matching the dynamic
> >range of our eyes, so to say any film "accurately" records
> >colors is just a question of whether the film lies more or
> >lies less.
>
> Agreed.  But for my purposes, the less lying, the better.
>
> >Maybe it's badly processed Kodachrome, but maybe there is
> >really no such thing as well-processed Kodachrome anymore.
>
> Please God, give me a sign that it isn't so.
>
> >Gary Nored likes to say of his love for Velvia, "If it's worth
> >doing, it's worth doing to extreme."  I don't agree in every
> >respect, but I'm more in that camp than in the "accuracy" camp.
>
> Actually, I can visualize the extreme - it looks a lot like the set from
the
> Tele Tubbies.  I would hope there would be place for both camps.  But it
> is getting to be awfully lonely here in the "accuracy" camp.
>
> Oleg Vorobyoff
>
>
>
>
>