Welcome to Gaia! ::

But again, a)how many persons in here works really in the darkroom b) is darkroom available for all those actions, what photomanipulationg offers? (I doubt really hard that latter option).
Comparing to finishing picture and photomanipulating, they are still different things; how many times you need to use lasso when you are finishin your picture? How about then copy/paste-actions and layers? An the main idea of them is totally different; give the photo for photomanipulator, he/she does make it look totally different, what it was originally, but give the photo to photographer, he/she tries to set it look as good as possible, not to make it look totally another, like manipulator does.
It maybe doesn't nee a new subforum, but the name "techniques" is pretty distracting by comparing the ideas of these two medias.

Well - I for one, use both darkroom and digital techniques. Depending on my goals. As for what is possible in the darkroom - look at the work of Jerry Uelsmann - all done in a regular darkroom.. and unbelievable.



To color correct, balance and retouch well, all those tools are used very frequently. Layers, layer masks, blending modes, and the clone tool are among the most common tools for the digital darkroom. Even for the so called "straight photographers"



I would disagree with your characterization. Both the manipulator and the photographer are trying to make the image reflect their vision. My primary goal as photographer is not "as good as possible" - but to "communicate to the viewer the image and idea I wanted them to understand when I took the photograph." I cannot speak to your goals as a manipulator - but given the quality of your work, I would guess they are not as simplistic as "to make it look totally different."

They are two different art forms that share common techniques. I think we are confusing the idea of a technique with a name for an art, rather than a tool to achieve it.

But how many persons in HERE uses darkroom? I think that if there wouldn't be digital cameras, this guild wouldn't be so big at all. And comparing the most places (among the pros and amateurs) the digital is more common device than original film cameras.
I wonder where you are living; in here, it's pretty rare to see a PRO PHOTOGRAPHER to use masks, lasso or layers (if it isn't for safe). If to be correct, there is some sort discrimination of using too much Photoshop (color adjustments are of course ok, but when it comes to filter, masks and layers, it has got really conflict reactions).
But like taking the picture; photographer takes the pictures so, that you don't have to adjust it so much, but photomanipulator takes so, that she/he can adjust it more.

Did someone already suggest an image post or critique subforum?

yes I like this idea, it sounds really fun. We will definately implement this sometime soon.



P.S. I think photo posts and critiques can stay in the main forum, otherwise what would we post here? cool

Maybe there ought to be a separate thread for assigment suggestions in the Biweekly assigment subforum? I unno. >>''


Stereo.

Forum area idea!

Cn you put a section where people can post photos where other people can play?

Kind of like stock and it's good practice for people who want to practice editing.

In the process it can be a sort of editing help forum because if something was done that the photographer liked they could ask how the person did that.

make any sense?

Actually that depends on

A. the amount of manipulation in the photo.

and

B. The photographer you talk to. Many old school pros or just older pros are sometimes even insulted by photomanipulation. Some go as far as being turned off by the idea of using photoshop for your basic post processing. I've heard some say that it makes it too easy for the average joe to say they area photographer when the ones who came before use struggled with film and lighting and not knowing what you were going to get until you got it develope. Having to know metering, lighting, timing, and all the technical details to get the photo right. I've listened to may a rant like that. Granted yes this is the modern time and technology is advancing. Which in another sense with technology making photography so much easier. It's making so many more photographers and there for making it much harder to get noticed in the field.

Er ..uh .. oops. Sorry about that. I got a little carried away. I think I when off on a tangent there. ^_^;

But you got the idea.


On the same note though. Yes it would be a good idea to have different catagories for different tpyes of photography. IE:

Photomanips
Photojournalism
Portraits
Nature
Street Photography
Landscapes
Animal
black and whites
sepias
cross processing


I could go on. I don't know how many subforums/catagories you're allowed in the guild forums. But yes, with catagories separated like tis perhaps some folks specialize or focus more on one type of photography than another and this way it would be easier to find the topics that would interest them.

Whew, sorry for being so long winded. heart