analogous my friendI’ve taken a class on the history of photography from the camera obscura to the modern age as well... none of us were speaking about the 1800s.
Upvote
0
analogous my friendI’ve taken a class on the history of photography from the camera obscura to the modern age as well... none of us were speaking about the 1800s.
Well I am still finding it too good to be true. Is this the clue that this is a joke? I mean mirror-less camera shooting in mechanical mode?that is my assumption but the spec say specifically "12fps mechanical, 20fps electronic " both EVF and live mode are electronic.
Correct.
They are - because of the interpretation. They are adding their own creativity to what is there.
I've seen many artists paint landscapes in a studio - landscapes they came up with entirely from their mind based on past experiences and their own imagination. That's art. Shooting a picture of a landscape, no matter how expertly done, isn't art to me, it's skill.
It's funny how many photographers defend photography as an art. I think it's insecurity - they are unwilling as a group to admit they do photography because they aren't very artistic. I just happen to be a photographer that's willing to admit that fact, and that's uncomfortable to many people. I think most people who call themselves "fine art photographers" would be painters if they had the talent and skill to do so. They don't, so they took up photography. Some then became greatly skilled in photography, and there's nothing at all wrong with that. In fact, I think it takes a lot of skill to become good at at least some types of photography, probably most types.
Thanks. But hat problems with CPS, as Switzerland is not in the EU
Mirrorless cameras still use a mechanical shutter, so there is still some fast-moving parts in there. An electronic shutter doesn't have the moving parts. The a9ii can only do 20 fps with electronic shutter, and drops down to 10 fps with a mechanical shutter. I wouldn't take this as a sign that it's a joke - this would be faster than then a9II in mechanical, and equivalent in electronic mode.Well I am still finding it too good to be true. Is this the clue that this is a joke? I mean mirror-less camera shooting in mechanical mode?
Well I am still finding it too good to be true. Is this the clue that this is a joke? I mean mirror-less camera shooting in mechanical mode?
That being said, there is no logical consistency in your position of considering a painter of a landscape and a photographer of a landscape two different things. You just said the painter's "interpretation" of a landscape is why it is art, bringing up doing it from their mind's eye in a studio - so if they sit on their porch and paint what they see, are they then not artists?
How the picture gets there is a product of a camera and a lens, of course, but it's not that simple. Focal length, aperture, and exposure time play a significant role into how that scene is represented, as well as the photographer's framing and positioning.
The bottom line is you could send two people to the same spot at the same time with the same camera and lens and result in a physical output that looks totally different.
You could also send the same camera file to two different people, who would do different things with it. Perhaps your point is that the photographer is less important than the finishing in terms of art, but if a photographer achieves what they intended in-camera, they shouldn't be "penalized" for that.
Arguments aside, art is not defined by a dictionary. It's defined by the artist and their audience.
Your argument is as wrong-headed to me as those who used to suggest that rap isn't music
What are your thoughts on photos that receive substantial post production (i.e. color swapping, dodging/burning, warping, removal of distractions or chosen elements, etc.)? Does it then cease to be photography and become art or is it something else entirely? One could argue a photo that receives aggressive post production has similar creative choices that would be made by a landscape painter in this case, but certainly there are those that don't think of that as photography either.---They are - because of the interpretation. They are adding their own creativity to what is there.
I've seen many artists paint landscapes in a studio - landscapes they came up with entirely from their mind based on past experiences and their own imagination. That's art. Shooting a picture of a landscape, no matter how expertly done, isn't art to me, it's skill.
...
It's still a cold, thoughtless, rote recording of what the camera is pointed at.
That they are different doesn't make either one of them art. Neither came from their mind, both came from nature.
I never said anything about "less important" or "penalized". Not being "art" isn't an insult. To me, it's a complement. "Art" isn't "above" craft, technique or skill, it's just different.
Then the word has no meaning.
To quote one of my favorite songs (don't worry, you've never heard of it), "and now the oxymoron of all oxymorons, rap music!".
This is a spec better than the new Sony A9 II which has 10 fps mechanical and 20 fps electronic.....Well I am still finding it too good to be true. Is this the clue that this is a joke? I mean mirror-less camera shooting in mechanical mode?
Why? 1DX3 have many important pro features not in 5D/R5.
Maybe in how you take photos, but not most people. Using aperture to control background defocus, and slow shutter speeds to blur running water being 2 prominent examples used by nearly everyone.
I really have no clue where you came up with this definition.
This isn't what the general public thinks. It isn't what artists, even painters and sculptors, think. It isn't what they teach in college. It doesn't inform art gallery purchasing decisions. This is like some idea you came up with drunk one day and have continued to hold on to (and fight about), like flat earthers.
that you have made assumptions about songs I know and don't, unless you are referring to something you wrote and recorded and never published.
Well I am still finding it too good to be true. Is this the clue that this is a joke? I mean mirror-less camera shooting in mechanical mode?
And many times banding (not the one that used to exist in the shadows! A very obvious one even in well lit photos!) I assume it depends on artificial lighting.Mirrorless cameras still use mechanical shutters. 12 fps would be mechanical shutter (no or minimum rolling shutter effect; reduced flicker effects) and 20 fps would be electronic 'shutter' with the mechanical locked open (rolling shutter effects and more prone to flicker).