5 ms·

Because of the extensive photoshopping (and HDR as the other comment mentions), none of these photos look real to me, more like a video game background. Which I

by 205guy 6y ago

Because of the extensive photoshopping (and HDR as the other comment mentions), none of these photos look real to me, more like a video game background. Which I think is a shame, because I like ruins and scenes of industrial decay, so I do like the subject matter. And the author clearly did a lot of work to find these old cars and photograph their interesting character. I understand the desire to fix the light (and certainly the dark forest settings were difficult to capture), but it just looks overdone to me, no longer real life.

Ididntdothis 6y ago
I guess it's a matter of taste. Your probably could process them in different ways. Maybe a gritty black and white would work.
ekianjo 6y ago
We don't see much "real pictures" anymore - everything is so edited to the max (extreme saturation, filtering, color adjustment, unreal sharpening, boosted highlights) that pictures look fake about everywhere now. At least if it were done in a subtle way I would not mind, but 90% have no taste when doing it.
- Moru 6y ago
  It's also about your monitor compared to the editors monitor. Those cheap displays that are set to look good in the store next to all the others will make you do things to photos that won't look good anywhere.
mcbuilder 6y ago
Maybe check out Kyle McDougall, he is a photographer interested in similar themes (decayed motels, cars, ghost towns, etc), but his photographs are much more compelling. Edit: link to his website https://www.kylemcdougallphoto.com/ https://www.kylemcdougallphoto.com/
- a012 6y ago
  Thanks for the link, I have an impression of Kodak Portra film on his photos.
  - ThrowItAway2Day 6y ago
    Check out his YouTube channel, that's one of his favorite film stocks.
- 205guy 6y ago
  Those are nice, and they remind me of pulling the exposure with film (overexposure and under-developed) to give that slightly washed out look. But it works with his subjects—and still looks natural to me—because it matches the bright light and slight haze of the high plains and desert. BTW, I found the original submission photos to be compelling, very cool compositions just jarring colors.
- Kaibeezy 6y ago
  I really like those. Thanks for the link. At the other end of this same spectrum, there’s Troy Paiva, who has gotten quite a bit of press for nighttime “light painting” of abandoned aircraft, cars, rural buildings, etc. https://lostamerica.com/photo-items/the-mojave-airport-boneyard/ https://lostamerica.com/photo-items/the-mojave-airport-boney...
- mc32 6y ago
  Those remind me of a Stephen Shore aesthetic but maybe with less social commentary.
- ThrowItAway2Day 6y ago
  My personal favorite photographer on social media is Nick Carver out of Orange County, CA. He covers similar themes (Americana, forgotten architecture, desert landscapes) all on medium and large format film. He walks through his techniques and is very enjoyable to listen to!
  - ThrowItAway2Day 6y ago
ordu 6y ago
> I understand the desire to fix the light (and certainly the dark forest settings were difficult to capture), but it just looks overdone to me, no longer real life. It seems for me, that the goal of editing was not to fix the light, but to move away from real life. Probably something along lines "to reduce level of detail, to let onlooker's mind to fill gaps in details by itself". Or maybe not: this possible explanation is a result of my mind filling gaps, so it is a projection of my mind onto reality which speaks more about me than about reality.
- 205guy 6y ago
  You’re probably right that the photographer intended to make the images slightly surreal on purpose, and then it’s a matter of taste whether it resonates with the viewer. I suppose all I’m saying is that I prefer to see photography that is still based on real conditions. I realize all photos are enhanced, either in post or in the phone camera. Sometimes it’s necessary to “fix” bad lighting or make something “pop,” but I prefer it when it’s subtle and still realistic. Ansel Adams tweaked the heck out of his prints (contrast and dodging and burning), but the result still looks like a natural scene, as it might appear when the light is just right. Instagram filters have the same problem, they might convey a mood but many of them look unnatural, for example an outdoor shot with fluorescent sunlight. I probably shouldn’t call it a problem, it’s just an artistic statement (for example choosing a hue to match the mood), though with filters it does feel a bit commodified nowadays.
  - saiya-jin 6y ago
    This is highly subjective, what one likes another doesn't, and over-processing photography is definitely there. Kind of artistic taste topic, one reveres Rembrandt school and another Warhol/Picasso. I for one agree with OP - fix what you can from RAW since it rarely looks like reality, unless having ideal lighting conditions. But this 'overprocessing' (aka moving away from real look) is too much for me, I like how reality looks like already. I see it everywhere these days - street photography, landscapes, even portraits. Folks often tend to do the same effect over and over for all photos, so everything looks the same. Almost like copy&paste in Lightroom. I mean great photos done in full frame/medium format cameras, then changed to look way too unrealistic. I've done similar when I was beginning in photography with 'the more the better' logic, but the appeal is just not there anymore.
throwanem 6y ago
Okay? And? Go take your own shots and develop them however you see fit. Purely documentary photography only happens in news stories, crime scenes, surgical theaters, and morgues. Everything else is art, to some greater or lesser degree. If you don't like impressionism or whatever, fine, but you add nothing to the conversation in just saying "this is bad because I don't like it" as if that had any use to anyone - that's not even valid criticism, which is an embarrassingly low bar to fail to clear.
gherkinnn 6y ago
I agree. Reminds me of the HDR craze around 2010.
samizdis 6y ago
> I like ruins and scenes of industrial decay You might well like this: https://www.abandonedamerica.us/ https://www.abandonedamerica.us/
mc32 6y ago
Some of them are way overdone. So much so they’re hard to look at because they look garish. Others are more muted and add some “atmosphere”. Overall I agree that natural light or even stage lights would have been preferred.

by 205guy 6y ago

Ididntdothis 6y ago

I guess it's a matter of taste. Your probably could process them in different ways. Maybe a gritty black and white would work.

ekianjo 6y ago

We don't see much "real pictures" anymore - everything is so edited to the max (extreme saturation, filtering, color adjustment, unreal sharpening, boosted highlights) that pictures look fake about everywhere now. At least if it were done in a subtle way I would not mind, but 90% have no taste when doing it.

Moru 6y ago
It's also about your monitor compared to the editors monitor. Those cheap displays that are set to look good in the store next to all the others will make you do things to photos that won't look good anywhere.

mcbuilder 6y ago

Maybe check out Kyle McDougall, he is a photographer interested in similar themes (decayed motels, cars, ghost towns, etc), but his photographs are much more compelling. Edit: link to his website https://www.kylemcdougallphoto.com/ https://www.kylemcdougallphoto.com/

a012 6y ago
Thanks for the link, I have an impression of Kodak Portra film on his photos.
- ThrowItAway2Day 6y ago
  Check out his YouTube channel, that's one of his favorite film stocks.
205guy 6y ago
Those are nice, and they remind me of pulling the exposure with film (overexposure and under-developed) to give that slightly washed out look. But it works with his subjects—and still looks natural to me—because it matches the bright light and slight haze of the high plains and desert. BTW, I found the original submission photos to be compelling, very cool compositions just jarring colors.
Kaibeezy 6y ago
I really like those. Thanks for the link. At the other end of this same spectrum, there’s Troy Paiva, who has gotten quite a bit of press for nighttime “light painting” of abandoned aircraft, cars, rural buildings, etc. https://lostamerica.com/photo-items/the-mojave-airport-boneyard/ https://lostamerica.com/photo-items/the-mojave-airport-boney...
mc32 6y ago
Those remind me of a Stephen Shore aesthetic but maybe with less social commentary.
ThrowItAway2Day 6y ago
My personal favorite photographer on social media is Nick Carver out of Orange County, CA. He covers similar themes (Americana, forgotten architecture, desert landscapes) all on medium and large format film. He walks through his techniques and is very enjoyable to listen to!
- ThrowItAway2Day 6y ago

ordu 6y ago

> I understand the desire to fix the light (and certainly the dark forest settings were difficult to capture), but it just looks overdone to me, no longer real life. It seems for me, that the goal of editing was not to fix the light, but to move away from real life. Probably something along lines "to reduce level of detail, to let onlooker's mind to fill gaps in details by itself". Or maybe not: this possible explanation is a result of my mind filling gaps, so it is a projection of my mind onto reality which speaks more about me than about reality.

205guy 6y ago
You’re probably right that the photographer intended to make the images slightly surreal on purpose, and then it’s a matter of taste whether it resonates with the viewer. I suppose all I’m saying is that I prefer to see photography that is still based on real conditions. I realize all photos are enhanced, either in post or in the phone camera. Sometimes it’s necessary to “fix” bad lighting or make something “pop,” but I prefer it when it’s subtle and still realistic. Ansel Adams tweaked the heck out of his prints (contrast and dodging and burning), but the result still looks like a natural scene, as it might appear when the light is just right. Instagram filters have the same problem, they might convey a mood but many of them look unnatural, for example an outdoor shot with fluorescent sunlight. I probably shouldn’t call it a problem, it’s just an artistic statement (for example choosing a hue to match the mood), though with filters it does feel a bit commodified nowadays.
- saiya-jin 6y ago
  This is highly subjective, what one likes another doesn't, and over-processing photography is definitely there. Kind of artistic taste topic, one reveres Rembrandt school and another Warhol/Picasso. I for one agree with OP - fix what you can from RAW since it rarely looks like reality, unless having ideal lighting conditions. But this 'overprocessing' (aka moving away from real look) is too much for me, I like how reality looks like already. I see it everywhere these days - street photography, landscapes, even portraits. Folks often tend to do the same effect over and over for all photos, so everything looks the same. Almost like copy&paste in Lightroom. I mean great photos done in full frame/medium format cameras, then changed to look way too unrealistic. I've done similar when I was beginning in photography with 'the more the better' logic, but the appeal is just not there anymore.

throwanem 6y ago

Okay? And? Go take your own shots and develop them however you see fit. Purely documentary photography only happens in news stories, crime scenes, surgical theaters, and morgues. Everything else is art, to some greater or lesser degree. If you don't like impressionism or whatever, fine, but you add nothing to the conversation in just saying "this is bad because I don't like it" as if that had any use to anyone - that's not even valid criticism, which is an embarrassingly low bar to fail to clear.

gherkinnn 6y ago

I agree. Reminds me of the HDR craze around 2010.

samizdis 6y ago

> I like ruins and scenes of industrial decay You might well like this: https://www.abandonedamerica.us/ https://www.abandonedamerica.us/

mc32 6y ago

Some of them are way overdone. So much so they’re hard to look at because they look garish. Others are more muted and add some “atmosphere”. Overall I agree that natural light or even stage lights would have been preferred.