Large Format Landscapes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StoneNYC

Does "darkroom" equal PS?

---

Yes, it does. My self imposed rule for PS is that I don't do anything that couldn't be done in the traditional darkroom. Nothing is moved, added or taken away. I use the dodge, burn and simple contrast adjustments to try to get what I'm after.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottPhotoCo

Yes, it does. My self imposed rule for PS is that I don't do anything that couldn't be done in the traditional darkroom. Nothing is moved, added or taken away. I use the dodge, burn and simple contrast adjustments to try to get what I'm after.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

---

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottPhotoCo

Yes, it does. My self imposed rule for PS is that I don't do anything that couldn't be done in the traditional darkroom. Nothing is moved, added or taken away. I use the dodge, burn and simple contrast adjustments to try to get what I'm after.

---

“Writing poetry without meter is like playing tennis without a net.” - Robert Frost

Sounds like you two would get along :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Preston

...I'd like to hear what others have to say in reply to your comment...
--P

---

I'm surprised no one has commented on this Preston so I'll jump in. His post sounds trollish to me. He just joined the forum a month ago and then this post with pretty weak advice. To assume that we nothing of Weston and Adams and the others who came before us is pretty crazy. If he was legit, he needs to read more before he posts to see how much experience there is on this forum.

I've seen your images and you have many, many lovely landscape posts on this site. I'd ignore his comment and continue your current path. You're doing fine.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottPhotoCo

My self imposed rule for PS is that I don't do anything that couldn't be done in the traditional darkroom. Nothing is moved, added or taken away. I use the dodge, burn and simple contrast adjustments to try to get what I'm after.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

---

I also have a self-imposed rule with Photoshop. I don't do anything in Photoshop that I don't know how to do in Photoshop.

Dave,

Thanks for the comment about my work. I'll keep doing what I'm doing and enjoying every minute of it!

--P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jody_S

I also have a self-imposed rule with Photoshop. I don't do anything in Photoshop that I don't know how to do in Photoshop.

---

Hah!

Sometimes I do stuff in Photoshop that I don't know that I'm doing, and everything gets messed up, and then I quit and stop using it for six months and then try again for a half a day trying to work on one picture, give up and then quit another three months... PS is useless to me... LR is much better and more along the lines of a photographers tool and less about graphic arts.

So my self imposed rule is, I don't do anything in PS...

Yeah Preston, you're doing fine!

Disregarding the irrelevance of the commentator's post in the context of your photograph,
always recommending people to look at and clone Mr. X or Mrs. Y is of no earthly use and is getting lame.
At the end everybody has to find their own path from within,
letting their intuitions, thoughts and willpower force them to do what feels good for them and their art.

Besides, placing people into landscapes photographs is IMHO completely inconsistent with the referenced protagonists.
Perhaps the commentator confuses Weston's nudes photographed "in the landscape" with landscape photography ;-)

So keep up the good work and never mind the bollocks,
Martin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Hofacker

Just a suggestion from an old-timer: check out some of the past masters like Ansel Adams and Edward Weston ... Personally, I like to include one or more small humans or animals in my landscapes to give scale, and I think it can enable some viewers to project themselves into the scene, sharing the photographer's experience.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Langendonk

I'm surprised no one has commented on this Preston so I'll jump in. His post sounds trollish to me. He just joined the forum a month ago and then this post with pretty weak advice. To assume that we nothing of Weston and Adams and the others who came before us is pretty crazy. If he was legit, he needs to read more before he posts to see how much experience there is on this forum.

I've seen your images and you have many, many lovely landscape posts on this site. I'd ignore his comment and continue your current path. You're doing fine.

Dave

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EOTS

... always recommending people to look at and clone Mr. X or Mrs. Y is of no earthly use and is getting lame.
... never mind the bollocks,
Martin

---

Wow, pretty rude comments I think. Richard Hofacker's post is a suggestion to look at old masters. I agree that that's a fairly superfluous comment, but not enough to ruffle feathers to the point of name calling or and saying he should read more posts to get to know us before he makes such comments. And telling Preston to ignore his comments???
Calling his comment lame and calling him a bollock is really unnecessary.

Geeze, I think he was trying to be friendly.

I am not at all certain that Richard Hofacker's post was directed at me, and honestly, I didn't take offence to it. I agree with Peter that Mr. Hofacker was simply making a suggestion to look at the work of others.

His comment that he likes to add 'hand-of-man' elements to his images is certainly valid, and if it works for him, that's OK with me. My reply to him was to show that I prefer to not have 'hand-of-man' elements in my images unless they add to what I am trying to say with the photograph.

I'd like to see some of Richard's images. Perhaps we can learn something from them.

--P