Sign up for our newsletter
Stay up to date on all the latest photography gear!Subscribe
Photo Of The Day By Robert HendersonToday’s Photo of the Day is...
Photo Of The Day By Max FosterToday’s Photo of the Day is “The...
Photo Of The Day By Ross StoneToday’s Photo of the Day is “Mobius...
Rafting Grand Canyon
For a new photo perspective on this iconic landscape, take a trip down the Colorado River.
Wildlife Photo Impact
Tips and insights for creating dynamic portraits of wildlife.
How To Use Histograms
For precise exposures that best capture a scene’s dynamic range, ignore what the image preview looks like and rely on the histogram.
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park: Boom, Baby!
Exploring the explosive beauty of Hawai‘i Volcanoes National Park.
Depth Of Field In Macro Photography
In macro photography, depth of field is especially important to ensure the details of your subject are sharp. Use these 5 tips to get the best results.
Watson Lake Park is located four miles north of downtown Prescott, Arizona.
This is the 1st of your 3 free articles
Become a member for unlimited website access and more.
FREE TRIAL Available!
Already a member? Sign in to continue reading
HDR, Filters, Saturation…Is It Really Photography?
Photo by Christopher Robinson
Some photos that we spotlighted from the early days of our American Landscape contest sparked a lively and, at times, a fierce discussion about “real” photography. It’s a big topic and one that I want to come back to in this blog post.
Modern photographers have some incredibly powerful digital tools at their disposal. Photoshop, HDR software, effects plug-ins have all changed the way we can work an image in the digital darkroom and today’s DSLRs continue to push the ISO envelope making it possible to shoot scenes that would have been impossible in the past. Some photographers suggest that using these tools is cheating. That the photographs that are the product of such technology aren’t real.
When I think of the greatest landscape photography, names like Ansel Adams, Eliot Porter, Galen Rowell and David Muench come to mind. Each of these artists of photography has used the tools at their disposal to achieve their own interpretation of the landscape. Their individual styles vary wildly from each other, yet none is more valid than another.
As cameras, software and printers improve and evolve, photographers are able to create photographs that connect viewers to the landscape with fewer and fewer limitations. Just as the word processor doesn’t make every writer into Hemmingway, powerful digital cameras and software are tools, and in the hands of an artist these tools can create magnificent and evocative images. Does using the tools at hand whether it’s a filter, software or the choice of a wide-angle versus a telephoto lens render a photograph less meaningful?
What do you think? Send your comments and let me know your opinion.