PAINTING VS. PHOTOGRAPHY

Paintings and photography each is a unique field, some people would say that a painting takes more talent than photography. I would disagree, the reason I would disagree is because a painting can be sculpted throughout its development. All the colors and textures and composition can be thought of and manipulated through a span of time. A photographer needs to compose, develop and captured in instant. There is however the ability to use a computer to manipulate the photographs after the capture, but this can only go so far.

The composition in a photograph when captured cannot be manipulated. The colors can only be manipulated a predetermined amount. If I wanted to add another bird to make the picture more interesting I would not be able to do that without the use of Photoshop, or some additional photo manipulating software. The resulting image would look more like a painting than a photograph. Over processing a digital image degrades on the fine quality the photograph provides.

Now don't get me wrong paint artists have an extreme talent, they in some cases may have a more creative focus on the subject at hand. But also have more time to be creative. Although, I’ve seen some paintings that actually blown my mind.

But I still think there is nothing more talent proving that a photograph, that when viewed hears the question “How did they get that?”

Just my opinion

Ronnie