Click on the photo to make it bigger. If a woman's hand rises up out of the water and is holding an ancient broadsword, take it and rule the kingdom wisely.
I showed this photo to Ziva before posting it, and she didn’t like it.
Why?
Because it’s fake. I took the picture of the clock, all right, but used a special-effects filter to create the lake below it.
As far as Ziva’s concerned, that’s not real photography. The issue of respect was raised, and I was forced to get rather stern with her, even though I understand her point of view, and generally agree.
But I can’t help myself.
I really, really, really love the look of this photo. I like the idea it creates that time is sinking into the dark waters of mysterious lake. I love the Steampunk look of the clock, and the richness of the yellow and turquoise, which happens to be my birth stone if you’re looking for a gift to give me.
To me, this is a photo illustration, and would be perfect for a book. Perhaps a book about the time and effort it can take to foster proper respect between dear friends.
———————————————
Please visit the other bloggers who agreed to participate in this time-waster photo challenge:
Ziva
Nicky and Mike
Mo
Meleah
John, aka nonamedufus
Bryan, aka Unfinished Person
Mariann
Malisa
Nora
Laughing Mom
Tanya
Elizabeth A.
00dozo
Kristen
Cheryl
Katherine
Aren’t you sneaky. But it works. The reflection in the faux water is what makes this picture fabulous even though it’s fake. Wish I could do stuff like that.
No, I’m not sneaky. A sneaky person wouldn’t have mentioned it, but I did. I’m more foolish than sneaky, inviting trouble where none need exist. And you can do stuff like this, because you have an iPhone, and I bought the lake-effect app on the app store.
But thank you, NoName.
I think the only thing I’ve added to a photo so far is words. I’ve put filtering on others, but not added anything. So I’m not a cheater.
But seriously, Michael, I think that is real photography. It is a work of art that you created. It reminds me of the movie Hugo, which I just recently watched. The book, though, The Invention of Hugo Cabret, is much better.
I wondered if anybody would see a link between this photo and Hugo, which is also what immediately leapt to my mind. I didn’t see the movie, but I saw the ads, and I thought the look of that film was very much like the look of this photo. We grok, Bryan.
Your commentary cracked me up. I adore this creation.
I swing both ways (ahem, on this issssssssss-ue). I believe pure photography and creating something new from a photo using the myriad of tools available can live harmoniously. The link is they’re both art forms. Anyone who can create this type of beautiful illusion gets my full respect.
Trust me, in photography circles, there is a boundary between the two. You’ve never crossed it. You always own your creations instead of passing them off as something you actually saw. Integrity matters.
Thank you for clarifying, and hastily, that by “swing both ways,” you didn’t mean anything salacious. Although I think I speak for nearly everybody when I say that’s terribly disappointing news, I appreciate your forthrightness, which is rare in today’s society. It reveals, dare I say it, your intregrity.
Well, you’ve certainly drawn the line in the sand today – either we side with you or Ziva. As she holds the whip, that makes for interesting choices. I must say that I love this picture and the effect that you created. I wonder what the response would have been without your discussion. Then again, many of us tire of reading your lengthy discussions and just skip to the comments – so maybe you’ll find out!
Actually, I didn’t draw the line in the sand, I … well, nevermind.
And thank you for admitting that “many” of you tire of reading my lengthy discussions and just skip to the comments. That sort of honesty, while hurtful and cruel, is greatly appreciated.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need some time alone. *sob*
Must have been that damn autocorrect stuff. Certainly by “many” I meant “me.”
Oh, good! Now I know who to focus my resentment on. (correct English version: Now I know upon whom to focus my resentment.)
Mike, you idiot, you’re trying to win this non-contest by making people dislike me, aren’t you?
Okay, listen people, I may or may not have called that picture fake, a disgrace to photography as a profession, and nothing but a a cheap trick to make people say “ooh” and “aah” when the real photo wasn’t enough, but let’s not make this into a “he said, she said” kind of thing.
To be serious, though, this picture is gorgeous, I agree with everyone there. It’s hauntingly beautiful, stunning, brilliant. And anyone can do it. All you need is an app and the know-how to press a button. The photo underneath this fake lake, that’s where the beauty really lies. The colors, the light, the perfect composition. Mike doesn’t need an iLake to make a beautiful photo.
That said, I’m not opposed the occasional trickery with photos, and have played around with it a little myself, (when I’m not busy playing with my whip, that is.) I don’t mind photos like this at all, but considering this started out as a photography challenge, where the idea was to get creative and to showcase what you can do with your SLR camera, your pocket camera, or your phone camera, and Michael has both the equipment and the talent needed to take amazing photos without resorting to beaver theft or over-watering, I simply told him I wish he’d have gone with the original photo.
Beaver theft, eh? Not going there.
Not sure what this beaver thing is about, all a bit crazy if you ask me…
The image is magnificent. At first glance it was too perfect to be a photo, but the photo, before the reflection was added, was almost certainly sublime, and I love the final production
Thank you, Mo. Thank the beaver, too.
It’s a serious crime.
“Mike, you idiot, you’re trying to win this non-contest by making people dislike me, aren’t you?”
Well, you did threaten to whip me, Ziva, and you know I’m half-British, and that there’s little the British like more than a good flogging. So you can hardly complain.
Basically, I agree with you, and with not a little guilt. It’s just that I like this photo-illustration a lot. It sparks my imagination, I guess. I disagree with you on one point: I’m not sure anybody could take the photo. I had to start with a good photo in order for the effect to work, and the original was both hard to get, and pretty cool all on its own.
And I promise to never again steal another man’s beaver. (Note to self: Add this sentence to the file, “Things I Never Thought I’d Say.”)
I love the gothic look to this, but I kinda wish I didn’t know that the reflection is fake.
See, I ruined if for you. And that’s bolsters Ziva’s argument. A trick photo is only as good as the trick it uses. A true photo, however, knows no limit.
I would have totally fell for the illusion otherwise.
This is a stunning photo, but I see Ziva’s point too. There are tricks that can be used for “special effects”, but the pure photo could have stood on it’s own without any enhancements. Still, it’s a marvelous image and I really like it. Plus, I’m not a purist in the first place.
I think this debate can’t be settled, is what I think. In the end, though, I’m leaning toward Ziva’s argument.
Much to their surprise, the new lunch-room clock really DID make the municipal sewer workers feel classier.
Thank you.
I began to laugh at your comment: time waster, er, photo contest. I wish I had something profound to say. I just don’t. I need some more coffee.
Profound is very hard to come by. I’ve been waiting for decades.
I was wondering when the lens caps would come off, but I will choose to stay neutral on this whole “enhancement” issue.
I will say, however, that this is a stunning photo and brilliant in its composition for today’s theme (with or without the lake).
I do have much longer lens that Ziva, I’ll say that.
Photoshopped or not, that is a GORGEOUS picture. The end.
And wait – she alters all of her photos when she makes them Black n White. So…..
I’m still debating whether it’s a real photograph. Ziva Moon raised a good point, and sparked a very interesting debate in my mind about the nature of photography as an artform. Does this picture qualifiy? I’m not sure. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad or unattractive picture, but I’m not sure it’s a “true” photograph, either, and, as Ziva points out, it may be that photography should mainly be about capturing the true essence of things, not manipulating images to tickle our brains or suit our fancies. I also think there’s a difference between using black and white and using a “lake effect” filter like the one I used. Black and white photos often emphasize something better than color photos. But the filter I used here is essentially a trick — it adds something to the photograph that wasn’t there in the first place. So Ziva’s point stands.
Ziva’s a really good photographer — maybe even a great photographer along the lines of Henri Cartier-Bresson or Annie Liebovitz, in my opinion — and even though I tease her, I listen to everything she has to say very carefully, and reflect on it for a long time. Yes, that’s partly because she carries a really large bullwhip. But she’s also very smart. And she has a bullwhip.
I like the photo. I think Ziva is going to beat you up though!
Oh, how I hope so! I have but one dream in life, and that is to be punished by Ziva!
As much as I love your photos, I think my favorite part of each post is the funny subtitles under each photo. You are too damn witty!
Mike, is it absolutely necessary for your photos to get better and better each day? Can’t you give us just a little break? This photo rocks! I am absolutely insisting that you instruct me in PhotoShop. My anti-math and science brain struggles with it. I am one of those people who think that using PhotoShop is just taking your photography skills up a level. What should be judge is the final product and your final product rocks…I mean floats!
I don’t think my photos are getting better, and I’m no expert in Photoshop, either. But I’d be glad to give you a few pointers.
And thanks for noticing the captions. They make me laugh.
I think you did the perfect solution. Amazing photograph. With great “editing” .. ( creating, whatever) and full disclosure. And, Ziva is right. The photo would have still been beautiful without the “creating” – but many of mine are as much editing and lights as they are photos. so… who am I to say anything.
I probably should’ve just used the original. I’m so weak….