oHo tēma
[visas]:
Foto digitālā apstrāde - attieksme
|
|
oHo (2005-02-08 22:48)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
| Cik tālu pēc digitālās apstrādes fotogrāfija paliek par fotogrāfiju un kurā brīdī tā top par datorgrafiku? Jūsu versijas? ;) |
|
Maverick (2005-02-08 22:56)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
Neuzskatu par nepieciešamu piesieties tieši digitālajai fotogrāfijai. Arī "parastā" fotogrāfija bieži vien pārkāpj sausas dokumentēšanas robežas un kļūst par "datorgrafiku" :)
Morāle : Galvenā ir ideja, nevis medijs :)))
Tāpat, kā nav būtisks vai mēs komunicējamies savā starpā ar ugunskuru dūmiem, semaforiem, pasta baložiem vai internetu, galvenais ir komunicēšanās starp cilvēkiem, bet medijs (vide) ir sekundāra :))) |
|
saabers (2005-02-10 14:23)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
viss, ko ir nepiecieshams zinaat par to, kas ir nemanipuleets atteels. terminologjiski man labaak patiik shaads apziimeejums.
An unmanipulated photograph is one that could be presented in a court of law or printed in a newspaper, without dishonesty or perjury by the photographer, as an accurate record of what the photographer saw and the camera captured, with the absolute minimum disturbance of the capture during the processing and finishing stages. A slide processed through standard chemistry is the paradigm for an unmanipulated image, and other types of photographs should strive, within the limits of technology, to be as close as possible to slides with respect to manipulation.
Futhermore,
* The image should be the result of a single exposure (shutter release) by the camera. Therefore, stitched panoramic images, multiple exposures, or composites of more than one image are all manipulated images for our purposes here.
* Contrast adjustments and color balance adjustments may be made in enlargement and printing, scanning software, image editing software, etc, as may -ive darkening or lightening of areas of the photograph (dodging and burning). But these should not be so extreme as to render the image an inaccurate or unrealistic representation of what the photographer saw. (It is not intended that this be interpreted in some psychological way -- for example that Van Gogh`s colors were in some subjective sense what he "saw".) Features may not be so darkened or lightened or changed in color that the effect is the same as if they were removed by a cloning tool. All images on photo.net are digital files, and most of these go through post-exposure color space conversions. We don`t state what transformations are allowed, but the emphasis should be on realism and the result should be as true to the original as practical, or at least should not be any more unrealistic than the effects produced by -ing normally available films.
* Sharpening tools are |
|
saabers (2005-02-10 14:23)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
* Cloning/airbrushing tools may only be used to remove miniscule processing artifacts, such as produced by dust, not to add features that were not captured by the camera or to move or remove unwanted features that were captured.
* No use of blurring tools is allowed.
* No use of perspective correction tools is allowed. Any perspective correction must be done pre-exposure through camera movements or PC lenses.
* Cropping is OK.
* Images created by processing film through non-standard chemistry such as "cross processing" are manipulated images.
* Pre-exposure manipulations such as staging scenes before the camera are OK, but should be disclosed in the Technical Details if the "unmanipulated" box is checked, and the caption should not lead the viewer to any false conclusions, such as implying that an animal is in the wild, when it was actually photographed in a zoo.
* colorizing a black and white image is not allowed.
* desaturating a color image to make it black and white is OK, provided the desaturation is complete and not -ive.
It should be emphasized that there is no requirement that all images submitted to photo.net meet these requirements. These standards apply only to images that are declared by the photographer to be "unmanipulated". |
|
KKTK (2005-02-10 17:51)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
Baigi jeedziigi uzraxtiic, buutiibaa visam var piekrist. Es tikai nesapratu par to sharposhanu "Sharpening tools are" Are what? Skaitaas atljauts vai neatljauts? Ceru ka atljauc, jo no nebuutu tad godiigi, jo digitaalajos tas defoltaa jau ir iekshaa... ;)
Veel tikai vareetu laikam piemineet roteeshanu, jo ne vienmeer tas horizonts tik taisns sanaak kaa gribeetos :]
Es personiigi lietoju tikai, roteeshanu, crop, kontrastu pagrozu un ja tiek samazinaats tad uzsharpoju. Vairaak niekiem parasti nav laika :D |
|
saabers (2005-02-10 18:34)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
ups...nepamaniiju :)))))
Sharpening tools are OK.
|
|
andrez (2005-02-11 14:02)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
| ROBEZHAS NAV ! |
|
andrez (2005-02-11 14:02)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
| robezha stiepjams jēdziens |
|
sahists (2005-02-14 05:01)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
Runaajot par analogo foto, paraadi man kaadu daudzmaz modernaa fotolaboratorijaa patlaban tapushu analogo bildi. Visas bildes, arii no filmaam tiek ciparotas. Analogais foto saglabaajas liidz briidim, kad caur filmu tiek spiidinaaata gaisma uz fotopapiira. Kas nu tas par analogo foto, ja negatiivs tiek skeneets un skeneetais materiaals (jau ciparu formaataa) tiek projiceets uz fotopapiira??
Lai gan spechuki apgalvo, un gan jau ka shierm var kaut kur piekrist, ka esot atshkjiriiba starp sho skeneeto materiaalu un to infu, kas naak no matricas.
Bet ja gribi analogaas bildes, tad seedi fotolaboratorijaa un njemies. Pats vees shad tad paniekojos.
Bet novilkt robezju starp ciparu bilzju apstraadi nav iespeejams. Un kaada galu galaa starpiiba, ja panaaktais rezultaats apmierina gan cenas, gan laika gan skataamiibas zinjaa. |
|
foto (2005-02-14 12:40)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
cipari, shkjiidumi, cipari...
ja uz digitaalaa atteela redzu ka nav taa kaa bija iisteniibaa, censhos to atguut. |
|
Andrs (2005-02-16 23:14)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
Saktiitaajam galvenais ir rezultaats, fotograafam nereti process.
Peec buutiibas apstraade jau paliek apstraade, analogaa vai digitaalaa.:-)) Kolekcionaari pagaidaam veertee tikai silver gelatyne tipa bildes, tacju arii vinju attieksme pamazaam mainaas. |
|
riks (2005-04-27 20:04)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
An unmanipulated photograph ja uzskaitiijums ir meegjinaajums formuleet, ko driikst/nedriikst, lai bilde vareetu tikt nodeeveeta par An unmanipulated photograph/y. OK. aaa, jaa - These standards apply only to images that are declared by the photographer to be "unmanipulated".
Bet no otru 1/2-si - ja taa mana bilde, kaa gribu, taisu! Garaa expoziicija ugunjoshanu/rakjeshu shaushanu reizees - arii tak shmaukshanaas, kaut atbilst /single exposure (shutter release) by the camera/ pusee bilzju 1na puse no rakjeteem jau nodzisusi, kameer 2ra veel nav izshauta.
/or composites of more than one image are all manipulated images/ - a sanaak, kaut shaun jau rakjetes ne taadeelj /vismaz ne tikai taadeelj/, lai taptu bilde/s. Klanu uz to, ka var kashkjeeties. |
|
deepgrey (2005-05-20 21:23)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
Digitaalaas bildes tik un taa ir peleeciigas un vinjas vajag uzprishinaat poligraafijai. Bet taa nav maaksla, vai ne?
Vispaar galvenaa probleema ar ko es saskaros ir zemaa izskjirtspeeja :( lielu plakaatu neuztaisiisi. nezinu kaapeec taa un vai to var mainiit? |
|
riks (2005-06-03 18:05)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
| Staasta, ka ir stiepjamaas programmas, bet izshkjirshanu jau nepaaugstina. |
|
riks (2005-06-03 18:07)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
Digitaalaas bildes... ...vajag uzprishinaat poligraafijai.
Varbuut, bet ja vien mushas nav apkjeeziijushas matricu, taas ir praktiski "tiiras", nav jaaklonee ciet puteklji u.c. meesli. |
|
Metols (2005-06-28 14:35)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
| ...digitālo neieredzu principā.Esmu no tās tautiņas kas sēž pie bilžu mašīnas pogām.Ja jūs redzētu ko jaunizcepti ,,ģēniji" sadara SHOPĀ`, tas viens.Otra lieta-filmu skanējot pagaidām ir krietni labāks rezultāts |
|
mazaa_punka (2005-07-26 22:35)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
| Ir jau smuki, bet vecajās parastajās bildēs ir sava veida romantika.... |
|
riks (2005-07-27 18:37)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
| Kaada romantika tehnologjiju, dezinformaacijas un pamperizaacijas laikmetaa! |
|
mazaa_punka (2005-07-27 19:33)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
|
| Romantika ir forša! Un nejaukt ar salkanumu... |
|
Andrs (2005-08-25 21:26)
[visi komentāri]
[visi komentāri šajā grupā] |
 |
| Ir gluzji vienalga kaadaa veidaa mirklja atteels tiek apstraadaats - kjiimiski vai arii elektroniski. |
|
|
