can we at least have it alive?

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
  • Not a Problem
Archived and Closed

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members. The community moderator provided the following reason for archiving: Not a problem

http://www.pixoto.com/images-photogra...

Should we all use props and imaging software for this cat?
Photo of d c

d c

  • 102 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes

Posted 6 years ago

  • 1
Photo of J

J

  • 626 Posts
  • 47 Reply Likes
huh?
Photo of d c

d c

  • 102 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Huh? This is a category for photos of animals. This is a digital art which should be put in the digital class. This in this form in this way is not found in nature or the real world. Unless maybe you include disney and pixar as well realistic.
Photo of Lenore

Lenore

  • 2835 Posts
  • 937 Reply Likes
Getting extremely close to insects often results in otherworldly images, as we don't see all these details when we look at a bug from a distance. And we especially don't normally see bugs with water drops on them at extremely close range.

In the Comments on that photo, the photographer has listed the macro lens he used. I think it's a great photo :-)
Photo of Lissa Apples

Lissa Apples

  • 162 Posts
  • 41 Reply Likes
This photo is possible with the use of a macro lens with extension tubes. It does seem a bit oversaturated, and I don't doubt that this bug is already dead. It is also possible that this image is a result of focus stacking; that is, taking several images with different focal points and layering them to have an artifically deeper depth of field. That being said, though, I've accomplished similar images of very small spiders with a 18mm lens mounted backwards with no special equipment (other than a reversing ring) or editing. So I know it's possible, and would definately not belong in the digital art category.
Photo of d c

d c

  • 102 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Lessa Apples you are the first to approach this from some experience and glad to see it. What you have said is true. The problem here is two fold I give you the first one. It isnt natural. It isnt a bug found in nature.

See if you find the second.

Fun for pixoto.
Photo of d c

d c

  • 102 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Well here is the second just because

http://copypasterepost.com/insects/fl...

paste your own fly eyes .com
Photo of Terry Gower

Terry Gower

  • 2016 Posts
  • 633 Reply Likes
Are you saying its not his? I see no names on your link. If its not his its copyright infringement, whether its alive or not.
Photo of d c

d c

  • 102 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Terry this is a digital construction. it isn't just one fly bug. dead and shot. it is totally digitized put together.
Under the rules section it allows a photo to be totally Photoshopped. But it states "In an effort to find the best, and most striking imagery, extensive use of Photoshop or other post processing techniques is allowed in all categories. However images that look like “digital art” rather than photography should be categorized as such."

This fly doesn't exist in nature in this form. period So can it be a animal.. not by definition of a animal.
Merriam - webster"1an·i·mal
noun \ˈa-nə-məl\

: a living thing that is not a human being or plant

: any living thing that is not a plant

1
: any of a kingdom (Animalia) of living things including many-celled organisms and often many of the single-celled ones (as protozoans) that typically differ from plants in having cells without cellulose walls, in lacking chlorophyll and the capacity for photosynthesis, in requiring more complex food materials (as proteins), in being organized to a greater degree of complexity, and in having the capacity for spontaneous movement and rapid motor responses to stimulation "
Photo of d c

d c

  • 102 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Terry Here is a excellent photo
http://www.pixoto.com/images-photogra...
This photo was Photoshopped But the bug neither has been altered from what it is it is a fly no waterdrops no addition of body parts not dead or a prop. Excellent work.
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
D C your correct this is digital art and really nice work but not natural I have always expected that because the droplets are right out of photoshop tutorials. Its just another case of no one watching. These photos have won many awards in animals depriving others of their awards.
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
The practice of adding fake droplets are also used on many flower photos as well. I will admit I have used a spray bottle from time to time to simulate morning dew its a hell of a lot easier then photoshop and its still natural.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.