Thank you everyone for watching. Feel free to leave comments for Tony to see! Don't forget to like the video and check out our Coffee with Creators Playlist: th-cam.com/play/PLwm6LvGc5xq0Rb9_UWaqVO5plyU-ONaae.html
Hey guys, - your discussion about ‘retouching’ reminds me of similar statements by Peter Lindbergh more than 10 years ago ... agreement all across the board 😊👏
I was a professional retoucher in the 80’s pre-Photoshop. I could do much of the same things people do digitally now (just not as fast). Make an 80 year old woman look 20? No problem. Lots of over retouching if the client wanted that. I will say this though, there is a difference between the way we see people in still photo vs. real life. In life we focus on animated eyes. In still photos we get distracted by moles we had never noticed.
When we only had film photography photography was about getting a print to look at. The print could be framed for display, put into a photo album or put in shoe boxes full of photos. Then digital photography happened and people had PC's, and later smart phones and people stopped having photos printed and are now happy to just view their images on a screen. Those early digital cameras were pretty crappy. They were expensive and produced lousy pics. But digital came a long way these past 20 years and gives everyone incredible capabilities. Instant results, instant ISO changes, white balance corrections and choices. Film can't do that. But if I shoot a black and white film minding my exposure, then properly processing that film and then choosing a nice B/W fiber paper to carefully print the negatives, bam...magic happens and a high quality print gets produced, and nothing can touch the beauty of that print. Newspapers and magazines are a disposable medium. Nice photos get printed in them but they are temporary periodicals that quickly go into the trash can. Wedding photography is still mostly about having prints to display, framed and in albums. There are many wonderful wedding photographers out there doing wonderful work but I'm seeing a lot of sub par print quality getting delivered as the end result product even though the photography was very good. I have never seen a modern wedding album nowadays with print quality of the film days.
Thank you everyone for watching. Feel free to leave comments for Tony to see!
Don't forget to like the video and check out our Coffee with Creators Playlist: th-cam.com/play/PLwm6LvGc5xq0Rb9_UWaqVO5plyU-ONaae.html
This was a GREAT episode
Hey guys, - your discussion about ‘retouching’ reminds me of similar statements by Peter Lindbergh more than 10 years ago ... agreement all across the board 😊👏
that joke at 1:04:00 landed perfectly nice job tony
I was a professional retoucher in the 80’s pre-Photoshop. I could do much of the same things people do digitally now (just not as fast). Make an 80 year old woman look 20? No problem. Lots of over retouching if the client wanted that. I will say this though, there is a difference between the way we see people in still photo vs. real life. In life we focus on animated eyes. In still photos we get distracted by moles we had never noticed.
That's why people shoot slide film, it's way better quality than normal film ever was, and I think it still gives digital a run for its money
When we only had film photography photography was about getting a print to look at. The print could be framed for display, put into a photo album or put in shoe boxes full of photos. Then digital photography happened and people had PC's, and later smart phones and people stopped having photos printed and are now happy to just view their images on a screen. Those early digital cameras were pretty crappy. They were expensive and produced lousy pics. But digital came a long way these past 20 years and gives everyone incredible capabilities. Instant results, instant ISO changes, white balance corrections and choices. Film can't do that.
But if I shoot a black and white film minding my exposure, then properly processing that film and then choosing a nice B/W fiber paper to carefully print the negatives, bam...magic happens and a high quality print gets produced, and nothing can touch the beauty of that print.
Newspapers and magazines are a disposable medium. Nice photos get printed in them but they are temporary periodicals that quickly go into the trash can. Wedding photography is still mostly about having prints to display, framed and in albums. There are many wonderful wedding photographers out there doing wonderful work but I'm seeing a lot of sub par print quality getting delivered as the end result product even though the photography was very good. I have never seen a modern wedding album nowadays with print quality of the film days.