wfinley

Kind of like the crowds booing Bob Dylan when he played his first electronic set? Or how about the riot that erupted after the first performance of Stravinsky's Le Sacre du Printemps? The same arguements against have been voiced before; any time a new medium is introduced there are many who will argue against it and say it isn't pure or isn't art.

Would you ask film photographers to do the same - i.e. ask photographers to point out images that have had color saturated or contrast increased? Ask them to disclose which rolls have been push processed? Above is an example of a digital panorama created from meshing 2 photographs together. This particular photo was posted on the front page of Salon.com and published as the coverpiece for 2 environmental newsletters. If a photograph works and conveys a message then it shouldn't matter what methods were used to create the photograph as long as the digital manipulation did not modify content or adjust "reality". I would argue that by merging two photographs I successfully created a photograph that conveys the immensity of an area that is on the verge of development. My techniques are no different than, say, Arctic Power taking a wide angle shot of frozen ground to illustrate the Arctic Refuge as a "wasteland". The journalistic integrity issue is also not so clear. Here's a great excerpt (emphasis added by me):

I'm with Gary - the line is too thin. I have a specific example in mind: this summer I took a shot of three people running downhill. We had just had a close bear encounter and were running like mad. i snapped the pic quickly then started running again. Back home I added a motion blur which was no different than if I had zoomed out while snapping the pic. What's the difference? Fashion photography is the perfect example. Photo altering / brushing etc. has gone on for years yet few argue that what they're looking at is not real. Furthermore -- there is skill and talent with coming back in and editing a photo digitally. True anyone can manipulate a photo just as anyone can take a photo. But only skilled users can take a decent photo and likewise only skilled user can manipulate a photo in a way that others can't tell if what they looking at is "real" or not. Finally I find it very ironic that this argument has arisen in the past 10 years (and will be argued for at least 10 more). If anyone recalls their art history lessons the exact same argument was made against photography at he turn of the century. Painters argued that photography - because it captured a scene instantly - was cheating and unfair and didn't show the true nature of an object or scene. Even Ayn Rand argued that photography is not art - stating that "many fine photographs are lucky accidents" but that "nothing in art is accidental". In this sense one could argue that digital manipulation is closer to art than true photography because the digital artist selects "the details of reality one at a time". However... as I've stated before - no one listens to Ayn Rand anymore. PS - check this out: http://www.apple.com/aperture/

Climbing: Descending the S. Ridge of Mt. Crossan with Mt. Hunter in the background. Scenic: Hulahula Valley, Arctic Refuge Skking: Skiing on the Scandinavia Glacier with False Norway and Finland Peaks in the background; Chugach Mountains. Ice: Ice at Caribou Creek, Southcentral Alaska. Bouldering: V2 on the West Buttress! Humor: Quality Reading regardless of the weather! Full sized pix are here: http://www.couloirgraphics.com/images/misc/miscpix/

Glad someone started this thread - I was holding my tongue. I always shoot slides and then scan the slides. Colors, dust etc change the image so I fix it. Conventional wisdom calls this photoshopping. When a person takes a digital image he/she can do anything to the raw image (have you seen Apple's latest toy "Apeture"?) -- yet since it's a raw image it's not considered photoshopping. Where's the line? If I take a color slide and it looks better B&W is it considered manipulation? How is that different from Joe Digital changing his images to sepia after he takes a few? I think it's time we stopped looking at digital photo manipulation as a detriment to 'artistic' integrity. Photoshop and digital manipulation is here to stay and is no different than manipulatiing a negative in a darkroom (like, for example, the Cottingley Fairy photos). </rant> That said... I have some killer pics of me on a portaledge with Paris Hilton - however The Star has already agreed to buy them so I can't post em here.

I've also rented Iridium phones from Outfitter Sat. They worked well in Alaska (have used them without problems in the Brooks, Chugach and Wrangells). I have also rented from friends who own a guiding busines; If you have any friends who guide and own a phone try calling them and offering to rent it for a week or two.

I'll take the adze - email sent!

I deleted my post... sorry I jumped the gun!

Post deleted by wfinley

You're quoting Ann Rand to help prove a point? I didn't think anyone took her seriously anymore. Apparently you've put a bit of thought into her works though if you can quickly dredge up the selection where Dagny meets the pirate. Objectivity can be used to justifify anything that requires one to ignore the inner voice that most refer to as a conscience.

Thanks all!

Wow - someone loves his Piranhas! What I have is below.

Right then... $100 to a friend - or $150 to a sucker who's not a friend!

I have an old pair of Simond Piranhas I'm selling to a friend. I have no clue how much they're worth and don't want to overcharge him. On the other hand I don't want to give them away since I just shelled out cash for new tools and am looking at Ramen for dinner. How much are they worth? They're pretty beat up - the rubber handle is worn off - but they're still solid tools.

Wow what a story --Never thought I'd hear the day a BD catalog saved a limb... now i know why I keep them around! Hope you heal soon!

Awesome job and great TR!

I'm undecided as to whether it was catching my first king or getting engaged.

Ditto on the Stylus... it's durable, fast and stands up to extreme cold.

FYI - $1 (US) = 40 baht... or $7.3 / night! Cheaper than a USFS campsite!

For what it's worth - I've rapped off of single Ti screws a few times and don't normally backup v-threads (unless the ice is funky). I usually haul them along as leaver screws.

"Drowning they say is the pleasantest. See your whole life in a flash." Joyce - Ulysses Chapter 6 (Hades)

Nevermind... my local climbing shop hooked me up witha pair of heel pieces for $10!

Just scored a pair of the old green 404's sans heel piece. I'm not familiar with the 404s - can anyone tell me what the heel piece looks like and how it clips into the binding? I have an old pair of 300s and I was hoping I could piece these togther and make something work - but I don't think I can. PS - if you have a heel pice you want to part with let me know.

How 'bout getting cookies to work in Safari.

In college I lived in a house with 2 other climbers. One of my housemates used to routinely pillage gear and every-time we went out climbing we'd have to dig through the crap in his room to find our cams, nuts or biners. Anyways... when it came time to move out my other housemate and I paid him back by grabbing a Tupperware container of re-fried beans that had been in the bottom of the fridge for months and sticking it in the bottom of one of his boxes. He didn't find it until the following fall.