Izzy

I may very well decide a few years from now that I took the detail a bit too far into HDR territory with this and other images, but for now I really like it. It's perhaps ironic that I look at other photographers doing similar things and that I don't like it. It's not lost on me that I may be indulging myself with the detail. That's no worry, though, because I save many different versions along the way. Everything from RAW and untouched, to this and beyond. I can decide later to make a new portfolio (or portfolios) with different versions. That's the beauty of photography, both with film and digital— there is no such thing as a definitive image. Even with famous masters, you might see what you think in a book is the definitive image. The reality is that that image in the book is in all likelihood rather inferior to the print it came from— not to mention that there may very well be many prints and versions, each with something different to offer. There are so many possibilities after the shot is taken. Of course little to nothing can be done, which is usually boring but sometimes perfect. Usually a variety of things are employed— such as old school film things like different development processes, burning & dodging, cropping, solarization, high contrast or low contrast papers or filters, and on and on. Now there is Photoshop, which is based off of film techniques but can do some things that could not be done with film. Both perfect B&W and color from the same shot! This can be both a blessing or a curse, but I try to look at it as a blessing...