Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ohkphoto" data-source="post: 41336" data-attributes="member: 1573">This is not aimed at anyone in particular, but it's come up here so I'll address it here.&nbsp; We've had this discussion some time earlier on a different thread about post processing, and the whole thing about &quot;purist&quot;.&nbsp; Unless you're a legitimate photojournalist, photography is art.&nbsp; What do you think Ansel Adams was doing in the darkroom?&nbsp; Nobody questioned his &quot;processing&quot; or demanded that he state how he processed his photos in the darkroom.&nbsp; The only difference today is that the darkroom is digital.If you want to be a purist, get a pinhole camera.&nbsp; I'm really tired of hearing that someone is a better photographer, or the photo is more impressive because there was no or little post processing.&nbsp; If you're shooting jpeg, your camera does the &quot;processing&quot;&nbsp; for you.&nbsp; So how impressive is that?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ohkphoto, post: 41336, member: 1573"] This is not aimed at anyone in particular, but it's come up here so I'll address it here. We've had this discussion some time earlier on a different thread about post processing, and the whole thing about "purist". Unless you're a legitimate photojournalist, photography [B]is[/B] art. What do you think Ansel Adams was doing in the darkroom? Nobody questioned his "processing" or demanded that he state how he processed his photos in the darkroom. The only difference today is that the darkroom is digital. If you want to be a purist, get a pinhole camera. I'm really tired of hearing that someone is a better photographer, or the photo is more impressive because there was no or little post processing. If you're shooting jpeg, your camera does the "processing" for you. So how impressive is that? [/QUOTE]

Verification