Two doors down there is a shed with a light on the apex of the roof. At night it's a picture, seriously perfect picture... even with a crappy camera like mine I think it would do well... good fore and background.
BUT (and you knew there had to be one right?)
There's a street light at 10 o'clock that I can't figure out a way to get out of the frame and the light from it would take the picture from "Wooooooo..." to "Oh yah, a shed." Now, I know shooting the street light out is probably bad. (I could leave off probably but it's for ART right? lol I keed. I keed.)
So, should I just shrug and not take it or take it and photoshop the light out of it? I ask this because it's no longer a picture if I start monkeying with it is it? I mean yanking a big honking light pole and light out of it is pretty much changing it a lot right?
Or is that OK? Is post processing assumed in just about any picture any more and I'm a naive dumbaxx for assuming all those great shots I see here are really that great in the raw?
Opinions? Thoughts? (No. I'm not going to shoot out the street light. That would be one of those "bad things" I keep reading about in the paper.
(For an example of some pictures I've taken check out my flickr page. They're not all great, but there are some good ones in there. One day I need to make an album of the ones I think are my best.)
1 comment:
One view is if you record it as it is, it is history; if you mess with it, it's art. One should not be confused with the other, but it's hard to tell the difference. Was it wrong to take the street lights out of the picture of the Worms bridge?
Post a Comment