Blue Bridge
Canon 5D mark II, Canon 20mm f/2.8 - 1/40 second, f/2.8, ISO 3200
RICH LEGG
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
I'm a photographer working in Salt Lake City, Utah. This is where I share my work on a regular basis.
View my complete profile
Search this site:
- Recapping the "Turkey Day" Photowalk
- 10 Reasons Why I Shop at Pictureline and You Shoul...
- Black Friday
- Thanksgiving Mini-Photowalk
- Canon 5D Mark II - On Assignment
- 5D Mark II in my hands
- Photoshop Tip: Blend a B&W Layer to add Edginess
- Life on the Street - Stock Photo Shoot
- "Free Image of the Week" at iStockphoto.com
- She Gets 110 Channels
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Unless otherwise noted, all photographs and text copyright 2005-2010 Rich Legg, Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction or redistribution in any form without prior written permission is strictly prohibited.
5 Comments:
Hard to believe thats ISO 3200, huh? When did you get the 5D2?
I would like to pose a question to get your opinion. I am president of our local camera club. We have montly competitions and our three categories are Black and White, Color, and Digitally Enhanced. The problem is we struggle in how to define digitally enhanced. Technically any print saved as a JPEG would be considered digitally enhanced but for competitions that would all but eliminate Black and White and Color as categories. So how would you define it?
@austin
I've had it for a week now. Great so far.
@Michael
That's a tough question. Nearly every image these days is "Digitally Enhanced", so where do you draw the line?
I would think a solution might be to come up with an acceptable amount of editing for the color and b&w categories. Stuff like sharpening, exposure adjustment, white balance adjustment, cropping, etc. should be okay. Anything beyond that would put the image in the "Digitally Altered" category.
Today's image is an example. Even though I have applied slight noise reduction, sharpening and color adjustments - I would think it would be a fitting entry for your "Color" category. But if I had gone on and further manipulated the image, it could go into "Digitally Altered"
I hope this helped...
Wow this is amazing. Nice job.
I meet with one of our members tonight to discuss Digitally Enhanced Category. I told him that I think we should consider Digitally Enhanced when there is obvious digital manipulation. To the point were the print no longer looks natural. The other member then suggested adding a new category called Digital Art. That category is easily defined as an artistic manipulation. Digitally Enhanced is still requiring further discussion. Thanks for your feedback and comments.
Post a Comment
<< Home