[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APML] Skill [was: Foveon Chip]
If one were limited to achromatic, manually-guided results but employed cutting
edge software manipulations, he could still produce solid compositions for
himself. But beyond that point, the work would suffer from unrealistic,
defocused colouration, oversized star artifacts, and myriad other inadequacies.
In other words, it would not be at the current technological levels reflected by a
contemporary using much more advanced equipment; autoguiders, apochromats, and
high end mounts-all at substantially higher cost.
These two astrophotographers of equal composing and manipulative skill levels
would not be on identical playing fields. An increased monetary investment would
then create a more desireable, peer-accepted work, particularly in general AP.
Thats a fact in a techologically-based field-and certainly where Science is
directly emulated. I'm not sure Chris meant much more than this.
______________
The notion that AP is art must be qualified, particularly if it was presented to a
group of Fine Artists whose intent was to create work through the integration of
both hemispheres of the brain-not just the left side. Going beyond the learning
stages is what Fine Art is all about. Rhythms of composition, fast and slow
lines, plays of contrasting value and temperature, re-interpretation of nature,
simplification, scale and perspective manipulation, method of media application,
are all under fine control. The artistic process can become filled with much
redundancy before an elegant product is produced. These factors cannot be
controlled astrophotographically beyond field size, target orientation and
software finalization. Never is Fine Art qualified or limited in any way, least
of all by its practitioner's financial level. The world is populated by many
poor, but wholly successful Fine Artists.
Photography can be artistic in the sense of limited use of learned technique
within the confines of the medium. Imagine Ansel Adams radically changing the
content of his landscapes for a personal, more simplified and poetic read! Doing
so-using more of the creative side-would cause instantaneous and negative peer
reaction, not to mention shocking the naturalists. Astrophotography is even more
limited due to its scientific nature: The furniture cannot be moved, simplified,
or changed with respect to content for the sake of the composition. That popular
objects of relatively unchanging shape and orientation are repeatedly imaged only
underscores the need for accuracy.
Can astrophotography be artistic? Yes. Art in the Fine sense? Absolutely not. In
AP, there is plenty of beauty to be had as long as one limits creativity levels to
accepted science. Currently, false colour work is having a showing, but is no
more than an exercise in frustration to creative persons or a tool to illustrate
chemical or physical composition. It is also a toe-testing of the waters of
acceptance in the scientific rendering community. But beyond this point,
unfortunately, credibility comes into play. Changing the orientation of IC434 to
Alnitak and killing 75% of the adjacent star field would be godhead stuff, moving
the work toward Fine Art but away from Science.
There has always been controversey concerning photography as an artform. Usually
though, it originates from the side lacking experience in Fine Art. I can still
have fun working with a camera and find more than a few challenges using it.
Stephen Pitt
Matt BenDaniel wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I think anyone who claims they "can't create beautiful astrophotos
> without big $" is making excuses for lack of motivation and talent.
>
> There are quite a number of astrophotographers on the APML who do
> excellent work on limited budgets (and with hard work and skill).
> Wonderfully beautiful wide field astro pix can be made for cheap:
> unguided piggyback, with a barn door, and on a tripod. The guys with
> $30K CCD systems can't do that. And there's quite a few rich guys who
> blow big $ on equipment and generate only mediocre pix.
>
> The skills needed for astrophotography have been continually changing.
> When gas-hypering became popular that was a new skill. Running an
> autoguider requires skill, and scanning, digital image processing, and
> yes, even CCD image capture and calibration all require skills. And the
> internet has accelerated the pace of everything. Excelling at any
> endeavor always requires learning new skills.
>
> So clicking a mouse is too easy to be bothered with? Why have so few
> astrophotographers mastered Picture Window or Photoshop LE? What does
> that have to do with money?
>
> If anyone feels their imagery is outgunned by big $, they need to stop
> feeling sorry for themselves and start focusing on doing the best they
> can with the equipment they can afford (or borrow). Learn new skills.
> Work hard. With talent and a bit of luck, you create beautiful art.
>
> Matt
>
> Chris & Jennifer Cook wrote:
> >
> > Steven -
> >
> > I agree. While I am happy for the folks who can fork over the $30,000 for
> > top rate imaging equipment(if I had it, I would too), astrophotography is
> > rapidly becoming a hobby of haves and have nots. It is also a hobby where
> > actual photographic talent is becoming less and less important. Back in the
> > old days, you actually had to have a talent in the darkroom to produce a
> > gallery quality print. You know, dodging and burning a image with your own
> > hands..... not clicking a mouse or reading a image processing article on the
> > web...........
> > Today there is very little talent involved. Spend $30K, buy a computer,
> > load the necessary software, read some articles out on the web and bingo,
> > you can produce observatory quality images from your backyard. There is no
> > talent here folks!
> > BTW, don't bother with the flames............ <g>
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > ==================
> > Chris Cook
> > Astronomical Photography
> > www.abmedia.com/astro
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: stephen pitt <lthuedk@pe.net>
> > To: astro-photo@seds.org <astro-photo@seds.org>
> > Date: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:16 PM
> > Subject: Re: [APML] Foveon Chip
> >
> > >This technology would eliminate the filter wheel nonsense and make CCD
> > >affordable through competition with the company that has a stranglehold on
> > chip
> > >prices. Lets face it, there's a large number of gifted APML emulsioneers
> > who
> > >could take CCD imaging much farther than it has been taken if the interest
> > >wasn't so exclusive. It is frustrating to be in a holding pattern,
> > watching
> > >only the affluent at play with equipment of outrageous cost-only to be told
> > we
> > >can have it all from the suburbs. Duh.
> > >
> > >We need a shot of competition in this "hobby," otherwise, it aint. Stephen
> > >Pitt
> > >
> > >Chris & Jennifer Cook wrote:
> > >
> > >> This looks to be a real turning point in digital imaging. I'm hoping the
> > >> big camera manufacturers start using the chips. I wonder if Foveon has a
> > 5
> > >> mega-pixel chip planned. I only saw that it went up to 3 mega-pixel.
> > >>
> > >> As far as applying it to deep sky imaging, I wonder if a chip like this
> > >> would work given is has good QE and blue sensitivity....... thoughts from
> > >> the CCD experts?
> > >>
> > >> Chris
> > >>
> > >> ==================
> > >> Chris Cook
> > >> Astronomical Photography
> > >> www.abmedia.com/astro
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: stephen pitt <lthuedk@pe.net>
> > >> To: astro-photo@seds.org <astro-photo@seds.org>
> > >> Date: Monday, February 11, 2002 11:25 AM
> > >> Subject: [APML] Foveon Chip
> > >>
> > >> >Current CCD chip architecture appears primative compared to this:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >http://www.dpreview.com/news/0202/02021101foveonx3.asp
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >Kodak's market supression is about to take a hit-unless of course, they
> > >> >buy out Foveon. sp
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >-- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
> > >> > Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> -- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
> > >> Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
> > > Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
> > >
> >
> > -- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
> > Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
>
> --
> Matt BenDaniel
> http://starmatt.com
>
> -- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
> Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>
-- APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/> ---
Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>