Beginner Shots Clock Tower

[tegan]

As I am sure you guys are aware, when lenses are reviewed by the magazines, barrel distortion and pin cushion distortion are looked at and measured as technical imperfections in the design of the lens.

The reason all photo editors have ways to correct lens distortion and the reason ds0's lens distortion correction software is so popular and successful despite being expensive is that pros and enthusiasts have been demanding methods to correct distortion in postprocessing. DS0 in fact has become the standard in this area.

Any artist should realize that if you keep your art to yourself, then quality doesn't matter, other viewers don't matter, and you can deceive yourself into thinking anything is great work.

The same is true for photography. Once you start to display, present, sell your work, then the standards of the viewer and the field become more important. What the photographer personally likes really doesn't matter, if he/she wants to be accepted/recognized as a capable, talented artist by others.

A photograph must stand on its own, subject to the standards in the field.
The manner in which technique is judged is simple...

If most viewers do NOT see that distortion CONTRIBUTES to the overall impact of the photo,...then it is a fault and a weakness.

The general guidelines are that lenses wider than 28mm are considered to be specialty lenses which means that their accompanying distortion is only effective in a very limited number of situations for example shooting down a round staircase from the top. Otherwise, dx0 and other software is used correct the distortion.

Even distortion from 28mm lenses can be unacceptable, depending on the camera angle and the subject and may need correction as well.

Basic to photography is that if a technique is not seen by the viewer(not the photographer by the way) as contributing to the overall effect of the photo then it is a fault and a weakness.

Agree or disagree, that is just how it is, in the field of photography.

Tegan

[Travis]

Basic to photography is that if a technique is not seen by the viewer(not the photographer by the way) as contributing to the overall effect of the photo then it is a fault and a weakness.

Tegan

But people use distortion to CONTRIBUTE to the overall effect. Distortion techniques can change the mood of the subject.

And trust me.... once technology eliminates barrel distortion in wide zooms there will be plenty of expensive plug ins to apply faux distortion.... just as the are plenty of plug ins to add noise/grain...

[tegan]

But people use distortion to CONTRIBUTE to the overall effect. Distortion techniques can change the mood of the subject...

People may use distortion to contribute to the overall effect BUT if most viewers do NOT see the contribution or the effect, then the photographer has failed in his/her objective.

Tegan

[Kiddo]

I thought distortion could be used as a style, as in Tirediron's shot on his ship, with the curved horizon. Or distortion using "fish eye" lenses.

If the distortion is "accidental" or non intended, then i can understand that could be seen as taking away from the image?

Just my 2 cents

[Dclark]

Thank you for all the tips and critiques.

In all honesty, the distortion is an accident and therefore removing from the actual photo itself.

In the future i will attempt to minimize distortion in all my shots unless intended.

Its easier to correct distortion with a tripod.

Thank you for all the feedback!

[tegan]

I thought distortion could be used as a style, as in Tirediron's shot on his ship, with the curved horizon. Or distortion using "fish eye" lenses.

If the distortion is "accidental" or non intended, then i can understand that could be seen as taking away from the image?

Just my 2 cents

No, you need to look at photography in terms of the viewer, not the photographer. The photo has to stand on its own in terms of quality, independent of what the photographer was trying to do or his/her style.

Tegan

[Travis]

No, you need to look at photography in terms of the viewer, not the photographer. The photo has to stand on its own in terms of quality, independent of what the photographer was trying to do or his/her style.

Tegan

you should add IMO to the end of this statement... there are no technical boundries an artist must submit to... an artist simply puts forth their contribution and it is either admired or it is not...

[tegan]

you should add IMO to the end of this statement... there are no technical boundries an artist must submit to... an artist simply puts forth their contribution and it is either admired or it is not...

No, because it is not my opinion. That is how photography is evaluated and chosen or ignored by art directors as well as by other top pros. Of course, anyone can ignore the standard criteria and have their work ignored as well.
If it is ignored by the art directors and other pros in positions of power, then it does NOT get chosen for gallery display, contest prizes, publication, purchase, etc. by the companies/organizations that they represent.

If you are a pro, in that position you could become a starving artist very quickly. Meeting the needs of your clients is the name of the game and when they are an organization, publication, company or newspaper there are standards and criteria that are often much higher than dealing with individuals.

Even as an amateur, when I was an early teen, my photos had to meet the technical and compositional criteria of the National Association of Photographic Art in order to be displayed, win recognition, and prizes.

Tegan

[mindforge]

I like the third the most. The others - to me - look like they were hurried and cropped or composed wrong and angled.