Comments on: Photography Is Photography

By: Chrysocolla

Chrysocolla — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 03:14:02 +0000

I’m more on Hamlet’s side of this one. Calling SL imagemaking photography makes as much sense to me as calling it painting.

SL is a 2D representation of a 3D model. Looking at SL is not the same as being in 3D space, and I find the process of looking at the world, imagining how the camera will see it and then capturing it is quite different than capturing SL images. I am reasonably skilled with cameras, but the screen of the SL viewer doesn’t behave like any camera I’ve ever used.

I’ve no idea why people -want- to call it photography, anyway.

By: CodeBastard Redgrave

CodeBastard Redgrave — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:04:27 +0000

dang, i love you cuddlefish XD

your analytic skills will never fail to impress me. again, your right on the spot. personally, being both in RL and SL pictures retouching, I can say SL pictures are even more work because of those vertex and “pointy bits” left my 3D rendering, often requiring up to an hour of Photoshop “Liquify” and “Heal” tool to get rid of them. we have to deal with lighting, and simulate other parameters found in RL photography to improve the realism of the pictures.

very good rebuttal dear

*snuggles with cuddlefish*

By: Coyote

Coyote — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:01:07 +0000

Sounds like Hamlet needs to read up on Ansel Adams and his development techniques. You can hardly refuse to call HIM a “photographer” just because only half his magic was done at the shutter click.

By: Shockwave Plasma

Shockwave Plasma — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:42:54 +0000

I agree with you Jacek, I think Vint has one on Hamlet this time