This morning, I saw Boo for the first time, and, having owned and worked a farm for a great deal of my life, I was thrilled with the textures, the light, the “being there in the moment” this work evoked for me. It’s real. It’s true to life. It’s so GOOD. …So I commented, and Anthony, bless him, popped me over a Bubblemail AND, with his persmission, I QUOTE:
SAID ANTHONY HEDGER : The textures like the fence in the shot of Boo was pushed in Photoshop un-sharp mask. People often tell me I am cheating by using a photo editing software apart from telling them to F* off they are talking out of their arse (fanny in America) I also tell them my work isn’t finished until I say so and if I want to tweak it here or there then so be it.
Then he asked my my opinion on the matter. Well here it is.
There is this “purists” attitude among…NOT the art buying public, but among artists and photographers that disdains any use of digital enhancement techniques. This same attitude also abounds toward digital verses real world art media. What do I say? This photograph is “finished.” It’s ART. It’s WONDERFUL, and any purist who can’t see that is BLINDED by his and her own prejudice.
Art does NOT require some adherence to a dictate of what an artist can or cannot do with whatever materials and techniques he or she decides to use and impliment in creating that piece of artwork. It’s the final output that IS the art, completely independent of HOW it was accomplished.
That’s my take.