Thank You to All The Incredibly Talented Forum Photographers

Discuss Fall Foliage in Vermont, when to come, where to stay, where to take a tour etc. Note: You must be registered in order to post. If you have trouble registering, use the contact us form on Scenes of Vermont's home page.

Moderators: Andy, pwt54, admin, ctyanky

Post Reply
ctyanky
Board Admin
Posts: 3123
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:22 am

Thank You to All The Incredibly Talented Forum Photographers

Post: # 10530Post ctyanky
Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:53 pm

The contribution of this forum’s group of photographers this year has been outstanding. I’ve not seen such vivid, beautiful pictures as in this 2009 season, both in links or inside the posts themselves.

In the few years that I've been active on the foliage forum, the number of talented photographers has grown immensely and I personally want to say thank you to all of you who have posted your Vermont pictures on this great site owned by Tim Palmer-Benson.

For those of us who are not so great with the camera :wink: (yet), who don’t have web pages to link from or who were not able to make it to Vermont this year, your photos are to be cherished. It makes it easy for us to view them at any given moment to savor this very special season.

New places for future travels, scenes we have once visited and wish to return to, and the vibrant leaves of Mother Nature’s foliage display that you have captured, compel us return to Vermont again and again.

Thank you, for bringing Vermont - heaven on earth - to our screens!
CT - Board Admin and Moderator for Scenes of Vermont
**************
Delicious autumn! My very soul is wedded to it, and if I were a bird I would fly about the earth seeking the successive autumns. ~George Eliot


Andy
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

Post: # 10564Post Andy
Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:10 pm

CT: I'll second that. I was just about to start a thread when I saw this one. I think this is the BEST year in terms of contributions, photography and overall enthusiasm for this site, since I joined back in 2005. Lets keep it going!

Great, great photos, and great back and forth. Hope some of you photographers will find time to come on over to the Photography Forum and spend some time talking about photography in Vermont!
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .

ctyanky
Board Admin
Posts: 3123
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:22 am

Post: # 10577Post ctyanky
Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:40 am

Tim, webmaster, had an opportunity for everyone to send him a photo so he could put it in the "Picture of the Day" section on foliage-vermont.

I think the post got buried during the season as many of them do. Perhaps next year, we can figure out a way to get this going again and make the picture of the day more visible with credit to the photographer of course.

Just a thought.... it would be nice to put it on the foliage forum page itself where everyone can see it. The activity on this page was phenomenal this year as Andy pointed out............
CT - Board Admin and Moderator for Scenes of Vermont
**************
Delicious autumn! My very soul is wedded to it, and if I were a bird I would fly about the earth seeking the successive autumns. ~George Eliot

Andy
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

Post: # 10578Post Andy
Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:42 am

I think Tim (rightfully) would like to get folks who come here to click into the main Foliage Vermont Page from time to time. It really is a nice resource. This forum seems to be the "hotspot" during the season and that is great. Maybe we can do a Sticky that has Photo of the Day and then link it to a page on FV.
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .

faxmachineanthem
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 11:11 am

Post: # 10585Post faxmachineanthem
Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:01 am

Regarding the picture of the day, in my humble opinion a change to the submission rules might encourage participation. The rules were that no editing at all is allowed. I understand that many people don't like the idea of "doctored" photos, and I certainly dislike most landscape photos that look unnatural. But I think some of the aversion to editing is due to a mistaken idea that film photographers didn't edit their prints. Ansel Adams, for instance, is known as the master of taking a negative and "editing" it in the darkroom. And I would doubt there are very many current pro photographers who do not work on their photos, yet still arrive at a natural looking output.

Not to belabor the point, but if you're shooting jpg files, your camera is performing editing functions like sharpening, contrast increase, vividness, etc. when the camera creates the file. Most serious photographers on the other hand purposely create a bland overexposed photograph so they can make their own editing decisions with software later. The only difference is that they're doing this work instead of the camera.

Obviously the admins of this site are free to run it as they choose, but just wanted to give some feedback on why I decided not to submit anything.


Andy
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Saginaw, Michigan
Contact:

Post: # 10631Post Andy
Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:28 am

FAX: I don't disagree with what you have said. A couple points:

1. Decisions about what can and cannot be posted and how they are posted are ultimately in the hands of the owner of this site. Those of us listed as forum administrators still must defer to him. Tim has been extremely gracious to all of us in offering this place to come at no charge and while I may not always agree with him on everything (indeed I don't think there are two persons alive that agree on everything), I have not qualms about deferring to his wishes.

2. Just a "nit." I think I know what you were referring to ("expose right for RAW images"?) when you say most serious photographers capture a "bland overexposed" image, I'll respectfully disagree and say we try to capture a properly exposed image :) . I realize its a matter of semantics and we mean the same thing. I agree that "out of the box" the image appears bland.

I have watched, and participated in the "manipulation" debate over the years and think you are absolutely right. It amuses me that somehow "digital" is "manipulation" but what Ansel did was "photography." If you read his own writings, he specifically says that he visualizes a certain image, captures what he can on film, and then goes to the darkroom to produce the print. Seems to me that a RAW capture and the post-processing is essentially similar, if not the same. I believe Adams would have enthusiastically embraced digital (and just as enthusiastically "manipulated").

The trouble with that in a forum like this is that there needs to be some standard. And that means somebody has to be the arbiter of that standard. I favor the approach we have migrated toward here (more this year than ever before) which is to have a member post photos they want to and let us see them all. We can be our own judge of "photo of the day" (if that is even necessary). In my view, the "photo of the day" starts to look too much like "contest" and that does not contribute to the sense of "community" we are beginning to generate here.

Hard as that is for many of us, we also need to realize that we "serious" photographers are in the (albeit very vocal) minority here.
Andy

If it sounds too good to be true, its probably . . . .


Post Reply