• 0 Posts
  • 5 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 6th, 2023
  • dreikelvin@lemmy.worldtopics@lemmy.world•Truth
    2·
    6 months ago

    high exposure is used on almost any high-level landscape photography, even during daylight and not exclusively auroras. there is nothing wrong with squeezing down a couple of minutes into one picture for a better visualization

  • dreikelvin@lemmy.worldtopics@lemmy.world•Truth
    1·
    6 months ago

    but that’s great. using long exposure is a skill that is highly regarded in the photographers community. early photo plates needed exposure for at least 7 minutes, requiring the subject to stand completely motionless. quite a challenge.

  • dreikelvin@lemmy.worldtopics@lemmy.world•Truth
    41·
    6 months ago

    I am all with you on editing images and creating a “fake” reality on social platforms.

    But this poses the question: how much has digital tech become part of our perception and is digitally enhancing a picture really much of a difference if it just helps us see more of the actual reality? I don’t think increasing exposure and contrast is changing reality, it just squeezes down what we cannot see so easily and makes it visible in that narrow slit that our human perception can actually process. We use digital editing nowadays that it has become part of our whole process of perceiving reality, so much so that the digital picture litterally replaces what we saw with our eyes - simply because digital photography has become an extension, much like glasses, shoes, cars are litterally a part of our body.

    Imho as long as it doesn’t create pixels from scratch that weren’t there in the first place, it is still viable to polish a picture of the sky to make it more appealing. I mean no buttcheeks were enhanced here, no eyes replaced or lips turned i to a grotesque sausage mouth freakshow 😅