So true Merv! Art is extremely subjective!

Thanks Phil, I appreciate the feedback, I’m working on a follow up to this blog post at the moment :)

Thanks Steve! Hope you are well in Melbourne, looking forward to getting back across there within the next 12 months I hope.. depends on how the little one goes I guess :)

For those critics of “post-processing”, good luck to them and by all means I hope they get enjoyment from their own photography. I myself don’t do very much post-processing at all but it does not make me enjoy any less, photos that have been post-processed to give us all the chance to view some beautiful works of art.

I to started off with my Black and White photography, feverishly messing with the prints in the developing and fixing trays in attempts to achieve that little something extra from my shots. Our use these days of digital aids to manipulate our digital shots is realistically no different from what we were doing with film and chemicals back in days past.

Keep up your fine work – I for one very much appreciate it! By the way the picture that has caused all the consternation is an absolute stunner.

..Phil Hill

If you process a raw image straight out of the camera without any post processing it leaves the photo flat and lifeless. The image is designed to be manipulated by using any of processing systems available and it is during this processing that the photograph is made to look as the image maker intended it to. Ansel Adams was quoted as saying “dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships”. I am sure that the knockers would not comment the same on one of his prints

The same is true in your photo of the Perth skyline, and that of the other photographers that you have mentioned in this article, the photographs has been post processed to show the different tonal relationships that the maker has intended to show, whether that is a lot or not so much, depends on how correct you got it in camera.
The problem with certain photographers is that they go too far and manipulate their images to the extreme, fuelling this Photoshop manipulation debate.

Paul, thankfully you are not one of these photographers. Keep up the good work.

I don’t have any problem as to how someone arrives at a finished image, if I like it I like it, if I don’t then I don’t and I usually say so either way. I’ve seen some really great landscapes images that have been ruined by over manipulation of a sky or a over saturated sunset color and I’ve also seen some hideously processed images that I actually like. The good thing about the arts of all persuasions is that they are highly subjective and we all have our own tastes. Having watched quite a bit of the last 2 years of the APPA’s on live streaming, nothing is more apparent. Too hear the opinions of some of the judges and their totally opposing views is very interesting. I watched a gold medal image judged last year and two judges had complete opposite opinions, one loved it, one totally disliked it and both of those judges are well known and highly respected award winning photographers.

Its all in the eye of the beholder.

Haha.. yes that’s one of my pet peeves, the implication that there is some magic button that turns a turd into gold :)