Comments on: The Dragan Effect http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/ "In the name of God, stop a moment, cease your work, look around you." - Leo Tolstoy Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:41:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: Videodrone http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-481 Videodrone Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:21:27 +0000 http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-481 The lighting in that portrait is amazing - very old masters style. Would love to be able to get shots like that! The lighting in that portrait is amazing - very old masters style.

Would love to be able to get shots like that!

]]> By: Christopher Scholl http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-430 Christopher Scholl Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:38:59 +0000 http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-430 Those are some interesting points, Brandon. If I understand you correctly, you are essentially advocating a "truth in advertising" sort of approach. I think, fundamentally, I agree with you. But just for the sake of discussion - do you think that approach should apply in the world of art? Since the intent of art is never all that clear to anyone but the artist, isn't it really a matter of a simple question: do you like it or not? Consider in the world of painting or sculpture, for example. Most of us know very little about how that is done and if a sculptor decided to use a mold of some sort, would we feel cheated? Perhaps. Perhaps not. I think what Dragan does is really pretty impressive regardless of its label... and regardless of the methods he used to achieve it. But I do think you raise some very interesting points that are worth considering. Thanks for the input! Those are some interesting points, Brandon. If I understand you correctly, you are essentially advocating a “truth in advertising” sort of approach. I think, fundamentally, I agree with you.

But just for the sake of discussion - do you think that approach should apply in the world of art? Since the intent of art is never all that clear to anyone but the artist, isn’t it really a matter of a simple question: do you like it or not? Consider in the world of painting or sculpture, for example. Most of us know very little about how that is done and if a sculptor decided to use a mold of some sort, would we feel cheated? Perhaps. Perhaps not.

I think what Dragan does is really pretty impressive regardless of its label… and regardless of the methods he used to achieve it.

But I do think you raise some very interesting points that are worth considering.

Thanks for the input!

]]> By: Brandon Foster http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-429 Brandon Foster Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:22:24 +0000 http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-429 What I was attempting to say is this: If you are going to illustrate something, then tell us that you are doing that. Don't sit there and give the people who are new to this the idea that you shot that out of camera. Call it a digital manipulation. It helps keep the rest of us straight on what is happening. I didn't say that his work was bad, ugly or awful. Quite the contrary. I think that he has taken something that is used less than it should be, and made it great. I just don't like being mislead. Call things what they are. He does great illustrations. He could be a little less pretentious about it though. The man is arrogant. Not saying that he is right or wrong for it, just saying that it is off putting. If he hates photography so much, then why does he sell his workflow? Why does he post to PDN? Why does he sell his work? Why does he do it? If I hate something, I don't repeatedly do it over and over. I stop and move on. What I was attempting to say is this:

If you are going to illustrate something, then tell us that you are doing that. Don’t sit there and give the people who are new to this the idea that you shot that out of camera. Call it a digital manipulation. It helps keep the rest of us straight on what is happening. I didn’t say that his work was bad, ugly or awful. Quite the contrary. I think that he has taken something that is used less than it should be, and made it great. I just don’t like being mislead. Call things what they are. He does great illustrations. He could be a little less pretentious about it though. The man is arrogant. Not saying that he is right or wrong for it, just saying that it is off putting. If he hates photography so much, then why does he sell his workflow? Why does he post to PDN? Why does he sell his work? Why does he do it? If I hate something, I don’t repeatedly do it over and over. I stop and move on.

]]> By: Christopher Scholl http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-428 Christopher Scholl Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:43:45 +0000 http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-428 You are entitled to you opinion, Brandon. But I think you are selling Dragan short by calling him "just another Photoshop Jock." It sounds to me as though the problem you have is with Dragan's manipulation of the images. But that has happened since photography began in some form or another. "Photoshop" is not a result, it is a tool some photographers enjoy using to achieve their desired effect. You may not like the effect perhaps and prefer a less-tampered look. But that's what's great about photography and the visual arts - there is room for all of us. You are entitled to you opinion, Brandon. But I think you are selling Dragan short by calling him “just another Photoshop Jock.” It sounds to me as though the problem you have is with Dragan’s manipulation of the images. But that has happened since photography began in some form or another. “Photoshop” is not a result, it is a tool some photographers enjoy using to achieve their desired effect.

You may not like the effect perhaps and prefer a less-tampered look. But that’s what’s great about photography and the visual arts - there is room for all of us.

]]> By: Brandon Foster http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-419 Brandon Foster Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:37:38 +0000 http://photographersjourney.com/2007/04/25/the-dragan-effect/#comment-419 The "Dragan Effect"? I don't think so. It is called light painting, and it is mostly sleight of hand with photoshop. Photos like these have been being produced for a while now. Dragan just took it and brought it to the mainstreams attention. I have seen many beautiful examples of work like this. Here is one example by Gary Edwards called shoes, http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2222313 I don't think that it is a deliberate attempt to copy Dragan's style. It would appear to me that he is just another Photoshop Jock flexing his muscles. I hope that more people do copy the style. Perhaps there will be a move back to more traditional photography. I.E, using light that actually exists, and not photoshopping it in. I heard a quote the other day, "Why reach for the stars when you can just shop them in?" With this kind of attitude how is the viewer to know what is real and what isn't? This so-called "Dragan" effect isn't even photography. It is extremely careful digital manipulation. Where is the integrity in that? I believe that photojournalists call it an illustration. Which is exactly what it is. These images are drawings, not photographs. Albeit digital drawings, but drawings nonetheless. ]]>