OnOne Software sent me an email for Perfect Photo Suite 6 with the message:

Create extraordinary images quickly and easily with Perfect Photo Suite 6.

I use one OnOne Software product, Perfect Resize, which is good at what it does — upsizing images with minimal sacrifice in image quality.

What pisses me off is the association of “extraordinary” with “quickly and easily”. This marketing morass is the bane of photography, implying that greatness in the medium is easily achievable. It isn’t.

Software is not photography. The extraordinary in photography is created in camera. The digital lightroom or the analog darkroom are simply tools that enable the photographer to craft the image to its fullest potential. In the interest of photographic craft, it’s important for photographers to not get lost in the hype.

This has been a public service announcement from Douglas Vincent Photography.

A little off topic for me, but my past years at Apple had me following this story. Today, Mike Daisey, was revealed by American Public Media to have fabricated multiple accounts of Chinese labor practice violations with respect to Apple Inc.. Part of Mike’s explanation:

What I do is not journalism. The tools of the theater are not the same as the tools of journalism. For this reason, I regret that I allowed THIS AMERICAN LIFE to air an excerpt from my monologue.

This America Life has retracted the originally aired show. MSNBC, the NY Times, and many other blog outlets will have to follow suit on similar journalistic exposes they ran or risk questions of their own credibility.

What bothers me is Mike Daisey. His pathetic justification of his actions reeks of ego and disregard for distinguishing right from wrong in attempting to drive awareness of an issue that is actually important. My guess is Fox News will probably hire him.

I’ve been a subscriber to Outdoor Photographer (OP) for years. I don’t read OP for its information, rather, I read it for its mis-information. There’s a reason the magazine doesn’t solicit reader feedback and opinion — it’d be ripped apart by those with more fundamental understandings of photography.

Case in point. Elizabeth Carmel is featured in the May 2011 issue under the title “Beyond the Range of Light”. A host of questionable, if not inaccurate statements, are made throughout the article:

“At first, she relied on the 2½-square format to give her maximum compositional versatility as well as image quality when she shot film.”

Film format has absolutely nothing to do with composition. Nor does camera “versatility” unless your speaking about tilts, swings and shifts. And 2½-square format is not maximum image quality.

“I believe that great fine-art photographs are a gateway through habitual thinking to a larger perspective.”

Nothing about a photograph has to be “fine art” to expand your perspective. Photo journalism is clear proof of that.

“Some of my images are more my own constructs, where I seek the realization of a specific vision in my final print.”

All images are constructs. This Ansel Adams rip-off pseudo babble, if correctly stated, would emphasize the importance of crafting exposure as a necessary means to realize the image in its final print form. The process is known as visualization.

“In Carmel’s photographs, you can see the evidence of how Photoshop lets a true artist translate the moment of capture to the final print.”

“True” artists use their tools transparently to create art. It’s called craft. The LAST thing a photographer wants to hear is the question “You used Photoshop to make that, didn’t you?”

It’s unfortunate that Elizabeth is subject of my first rant against Outdoor Photographer. As a commercial landscape photographer her work is to be admired. But she presumably approved this article that is full of mis-truths, inappropriate conclusions, and philosophies that deserve broader perspective.