chauncey wrote in post #18069517
I keep reading the camera movement suggestions that you guys refer to...they can all be accomplished in PS.
I gotta be honest, when your goal is "ART"...why the aversion to PS?
I've been thinking about this statement quite a bit.
While PS can take the photo you feed it and simulate camera movement, it really can't make the resultant image the same as if you had actually moved the camera when taking the photo.
Why? Well, the main reason that comes to mind is that PS is limited to the content you have in the photo you feed it. If I actually move the camera as I trigger the shutter, the exposure is able to capture what is quite literally a sweep of the scene before me. At the relatively narrow angle of view that I get when shooting at 100mm focal length on a 1.3 sensor camera I am able to capture the blue sky, the tree trunks, and the forest floor! If I look thru the viewfinder while holding the camera still, at that focal length and at the close distance I am to the trees, I will only see a small portion of the scene that I am capturing. Yet my exposure has blue at the top from the sky, whitish or brown tree trunks in the middle, and green at the bottom. If I just took one frame with the camera still, at that focal length, then there would not be all three elements (colors) present because the angle of view does not allow anything more than one of these elements to fit into the frame. So, if I am only capturing tree trunks, how in the world can PS know what would have been in the picture if I had been moving the camera?
Sure, I could shoot the whole scene wide to capture a lot more of the scene before me, and then feed that to Photoshop and let PS do it's motion blur thing.......but there is no way that is going to give me the exact look that I would have achieved if I had shot it at 100mm and moved the camera. There are so many things involved that would be changed, such as DOF, degree to which each portion of the scene is defocused, arrangement of the individual tree trunks in the frame, etc. There is just no way that PS is going to give you the same exact image that you would capture at 100mm.
PS can do a heck of a lot of things. It doesn't do all of them well. Why? Because most art has to be felt when it is being created. Felt, not programmed.
"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "mute point", NOT "mute point".