1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Do you "Take" or "Make" a Picture?

Discussion in 'Talking Pictures' started by PhotoEcosse, Nov 21, 2015.

  1. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Eric,

    Highlight: are you sure? Are you not selling yourself short?

    How are you defining "eminent"? Over the decades I've talked to lots of "very eminent" photographers, and as a general rule, the more "eminent" they've been, the less they've been inclined to draw false dichotomies between photography and art or between the three "categories" you present.

    My own suggestion is that the "degree of accidental overlap" is so great as to render the distinctions meaningless, cf. R. Mutt. I'm sure you're familiar with "Fountain" but for those who are not, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_(Duchamp)

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  2. PhotoEcosse

    PhotoEcosse Well-Known Member

    I am using "eminent" in the usual sense, Roger - "publicly recognised as being outstanding in their field". I am certainly not selling myself short by acknowledging that I stand a long way below them in artistic stature.

    Eric
     
  3. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Eric,

    By whom?

    I still suspect you may be selling yourself short. I repeat: "publicly recognised as being outstanding in their field" by whom?

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  4. PhotoEcosse

    PhotoEcosse Well-Known Member

    Here we go again.

    The playground bully mentality which seems to be your approach to every discussion, Roger.

    I thought you were sufficiently mature to realise that your views do not magically gain in credibility simply because you shout them more loudly or repeat them more frequently than anyone else.

    OK - I'll answer your tediously repetitive question. By the exceptionally talented folk who award distinctions for exceptionally high quality photographic achievements in the RPS, the PAGB, the FIAP, etc. People who are more eminent in the world of photography than you or I will ever be if we each live to be one hundred.

    And don't ask "who says so?" If you don't know the answer to that then you are ........... well, I don't want banned from the forum in the manner of the last guy who dared to stand up to your bullying, so I won't finish the sentence.

    Eric
     
  5. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Eric,

    As you say, here we go again.

    If you can't tell "playground bully" from "rational argument", I have to ask who has the problem here.

    Look back over the history of photography. Who ever gave a toss about "the RPS, the PAGB, the FIAP, etc.?" Yes, some good photographers were endorsed by these more or less august bodies. So were huge numbers of mediocrities. In the long term, the mediocrities drop out. I look at history. You look at... what?

    This is not bullying. This is a simple statement of fact.

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  6. Trannifan

    Trannifan Well-Known Member

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch.........................

    Whilst I generally take pictures, there are a few cases where I would say that the pictures are 'made'. Not so much by me as by my scanner. How? Well, I've got a couple of lenses where, for one reason or another, the automatic stop down isn't available. I use a separate exposure meter in such cases, but occasionally it happens that I'm so involved in what I'm doing that I forget to check the exposures. The result? Wildly overexposed pictures.

    So how does the scanner come into this? Well, there's an option Restore colour'. Actually this is intended for faded prints but one day, just for fun, as I was scanning a film, on one of these overexposed frames I clicked this option. The result was veerrryyyy interesting! I certainly didn't remember taking anything even vaguely approaching what the 'Restore colour' option produced. Since the gallery is down I can't show the result, but it was a picture not so much 'taken' by the photographer as 'made' by the scanner!

    Lynn
     
  7. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Dear Lynn,

    Or as I said much earlier in the thread, you manage to save the picture you took. Well, for a given value of "save", from what you say!

    Fascinating idea, though: I'll have to try it.

    Cheers,

    R.
     
  8. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    Just for the fun of it I've just posted two versions of the same image, from the same data, in the Exhibition Lounge.

    In my opinion they have been "made" from data "taken".

    *shrugs* YMMV.
     
  9. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Dunno, I just press the shutter release .

    :)

    Jack
     
  10. Trannifan

    Trannifan Well-Known Member

    It's very hit and miss. I tried deliberately over exposing some shots with this option in mind. The results looked as if the camera had been moving at a very high speed so that the grain on the film had become lines. The flower beds in the local park possibly weren't quite the 'right' objects.

    Lynn
     
  11. dan marchant

    dan marchant Active Member

    I mostly take photographs but I strive to make photographs. However I don't use "make" in the way that the OP does (to process or perform actions on an image that has already been captured). I use it in the way that Ansel Adams did - for him both Take and Make occurred before the shutter was pressed and what was meant was that a great photographer envisions an image before pressing the shutter and then captures it. Whereas a good photographer presses the shutter and then decides what the image is or just sees if it is any good or not. For me the OPs example was a "take" because he saw the image after he had already captured it.
     
  12. SXH

    SXH Well-Known Member

    Neither. I use a camera to freeze a moment in time to represent my interpretation of a sliver of the zeitgeist, for the edification of those that come after me.

    Or summat.

    ;)
     

Share This Page