THE DIGITAL IMAGE DEBATE .... Continues

By Bill Reid (C.R.C. Editor)

I make no apologies for continuing this debate. The following letter comes from the latest North & East Midlands Photographic Federation newsletter kindly sent by Editor Peter Cheetham.

This was in response to a judge who has refused his services to Club competitions due to his dislike of DI photographs being included. I find this very sad, for make no mistake DI is the “Future”, but we shouldn`t fear it as both mediums will work together for a long time yet. Not only because, for the time being, DI (for the amateur photographer) doen`t quite come up to quality and resolution. Manipualted pictures have a rather “sur-real” look difficult to avoid, plus just getting started is very expensive and not available to many people..

Silver Image users should see the computer and its software simply as a tool to help them gain various effects and providing the photographer doesn`t try to pass the manipulated prints as otherwise,they will have their place in photography.

Dear Pete I was surprised to read Paul Bloomer`s letter in Newsletter 64, where he questions his own competence to judge digitally manipulated images. There are too many other judges who happily judge work of which they have little or no experience.

Manipulating images has been happening ever since photography was invited, and Paul himself is a master of image manipulation (albeit chemically)! As photographers we all have the power to dictate the look of our image from the moment we decide to “make a picture”.

To start with we choose the film we use. Colour, Black & White, Slide or Negative, Fast for grain or slow for detail. We then choose the exposure; correct as per meter, or to under/over expose for effect. We also choose the relationship between aperture and shutter speed, to give either a great “Depth of Field” or to freeze movement. Finally, before pressing the shutter button we choose whether to put a filter in front of the lens, such as a polariser or graduated grey for landscapes or decide between either a vignette or soft focus filter, to hide the less kind lines on a face, in our portraits.

Once the film has been exposed we choose how to develop the film; with colour we might decide to cross process the film whereas with Black & White there are all manner of Developers to use, each with its own special characteristics.

Then, when processed, all manner of after work is available to us.

With slides, we can copy two or more together as a sandwich, or copy our original through patterned glass, thereby creating a new image. Or we can solarize for a really wacky effect (This I know is a speciality of Paul`s. Indeed it was his practical lecture encouraged me to have a go!). Whilst the slide worker can copy slide sandwiches the printer can print from several negatives onto one piece of paper.

For those who print from negatives the fun has just begun. At the very least, Black & White printers burn and dodge areas of their print to bring out the desired effect. Split grade printing, Toning, Colouring and Tinting all have their part to play in helping us photographers create the image we wanted when we first pressed the shutter.

Posterisation and solarisation of prints have their part to play in helping us to create the desired result, and so too does digital imaging. Digital imaging is only a tool to help the photographer get to their desired result. At the end of the day, when it comes to judging, it is the final image as presented by the photographer that matters. How the photographer got there is almost irrelevant. Almost, for in my opinion so long as all the component parts of the image are the author`s own work then anything goes. However if an author is using other peoples` images in their work then they cannot claim it as their own.

Personally I do not wish to see a great proliferation of “Digital” sections to competitions and exhibitions, just as I am against “Creative” or “Contemporary”, these are all artificial boundaries, lets see good imagery and not get hung up by technique. Let the image speak for itself. Yes there should be a separate section for nature and yes restraints on digital imaging in nature photography should remain. So Paul, its the image that counts and as an honest judge I would be pleased for you to judge my work, however I produced it.