Re: [photo-3d] Re: CGI

[drdave@xxxxxxxxxx]

Mike Kersenbrock writes:

> What is the definition of "photographic"?  Popular Photography
> magazine (note the journal's name) contains digital photography.
> In fact, the term "digital photography" implies that photography
> includes digital means to the image-producing end.

As I said in my original post digital photography and film photography 
are different types of photography as watercolor and oil are different 
types of painting. But each can be separated into distinct catagories.

> Does it matter if one knows if things were done digitally or
> not?

No, as they say "ignorance of the law is no excuse". Know what is being 
done to your image before you submit it. It is your responsibility.

> Taking film down to a photo-store, one might not know
> if the Fuji printer talked about had been used to make the
> prints (thus having been digitized and digitally printed within
> the machine if I understand what was being talked about.

This is going to be a difficult time as more and more printing goes to 
the digital format. Exhibitions will then have to decide how to word 
their entry requirements to accept digital photography but not computer 
generated imagery.

Just for the record I am all for any kind of image manipulation whether 
that be through digital photography, computer imagery, darkroom magic, 
scene manipulation, filters, camera tricks, or any combination thereof. 
It is the final result on the screen that counts (as long as ALL parts 
were done by the person submitting the image). It is up to each 
exhibition to clearly state what they want.

This really is all,

David W. Kesner
Boise, Idaho, USA
drdave@xxxxxxxxxx