hello again

--
۞ Question Authority ۞

u gt tagged...
here are the rules!
Link

--
Importance of Being Idle:
leonius.co.nr

Keep up the good work, I'll swing by and comment when I'm not about to pass out.



--
Bad grammar makes me [sic]

_{Avatar courtesy of *Kipicus}

Personally, I think this whole thing has gone too far. Your boyfriend and I disagree on the validity of digital photography as a medium vs. print photography. That's it. I actually rather like your artwork, especially Claddagh. It's great that you have access to a darkroom to develop your shots yourself. 99.99999999% of film photographers out there do not have such access. Most film photography that is dropped off at the local K-Mart or Wal-Mart and run with the special "Kodak Enhanced Processing" become digital pictures before they are printed, and are run through color/contrast/sharpness enhancements just like I use on my digital photos, only... the photographer has no say whatsoever in the final print... Like you, I spend quite a bit of time on the majority of my prints, until I have the shot exactly the way I want it. I bracket exposures two stops in each direction for the majority of my shots. My digital camera is generally set in either Aperture Priority or fully manual exposure mode (just like I used when I shot film).

I've seen outstanding work from pure film photographers, and I've seen utter garbage. I've seen outstanding work from digital photographers, and I've seen utter garbage. The same can be said for almost any medium. What's more important than the medium, IMO, is how much of yourself you put into your photos. What meaning is conveyed? For that, I point to your Claddagh photograph. Not only is it an excercise in depth of field, but it also conveys a very special message.

For me this entire argument has been expressly about whether or not 's photograph that was moved multiple times should have been moved. Your boyfriends position is that all digital photography should be under digital manipulation. 's position is quite contrary to this. Personally, I think all art should be categorized solely by subject, not by medium. That's my 2 cents.

I apologize for anything my wife may have stirred up here. I'm not interested in making enemies, I'm interested in showing and viewing art and making friends who share my love of art.

--
Four out of five statistics are made up.

First off, let me say my husband had no idea I was defending him. He chose to ignore your boyfriends meanspirited, juvenile remarks. I on the other hand am a Biatch and will not let people I care for be put down. My husband has been a photographer for many years using both film and digital medium.
You and your boyfriend are just spoiled teenage brats. He hasn't even had a new watch added to his sight in almost a year, which has to tell you that people come look and say no good ---goodby. My husband has been a Dev since the first of the year and already has more people who want to see what he is doing and enjoy what he is doing. I personally say who cares how many page views you have, it should be more important how many people want to be alerted when you do something new.
This will be the last time respond to you or your boyfriends juvenile behavior as my husband does not approve, believing art should speak for itself not needing to be defended in this manner. As I am the adult here I will just say I hope someday you will climb down off that high horse of yours before you fall.
Have a good life and make great art.. By the way your art is good......

I think it's so cute how you find other people's opinion so "cute"

you're just sooo precious...

--

it's just not the art that should be gr8 when an artist creates but also the artists personality that shows through his/her art.

You are no artist... you mam, are a tosser!

--
^{You laugh because I'm different... I laugh cause I just farted!
---
www.duhcoolies.com | designersCOUCH}

you mam, are a tosser!

--
۞ Question Authority ۞