Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
Sorry, not a fan of selective processing.
The end result is a total distortion/fabrication of the physical processes going on in the object.
I am very much an advocate of "respecting the light".
Non-linear transforms are absolutely fine, so long as they are applied globally and preserve the relativities of the object's intrinsic flux
With that level of "interpretation" you might as well get out the airbrush tool and draw the scene or use crayons...or whatever 
No law against it....but this crosses too many lines for my liking. |
Have to agree there on all counts.
My
personal taste is to show what is really there as accurately as is possible. One of the many reasons I instantly reject a starless image or a grossly vivid distortion of ionised gas/plasma colours. Whilst the eye can't detect narrow band particularly well without filtering and processing, I truly believe we should be showing it as correctly as we can, without taking artistic license.
Hockney vs Ansel Adams - both distorted reality to one extent or the other, but I for sure appreciate Adams' artistic license (contrast embellishment etc) over a Hockney techni-colour expression
