A Quote by Douglas McCulloh

To teach consequential photography, don't bother with Photoshop or f-stops. Create a craving for images. — © Douglas McCulloh
To teach consequential photography, don't bother with Photoshop or f-stops. Create a craving for images.
Humans have changed the landscape so much, but images of the sea could be shared with primordial people. I just project my imagination on to the viewer, even the first human being. I think first and then imagine some scenes. Then I go out and look for them. Or I re-create these images with my camera. I love photography because photography is the most believable medium. Painting can lie, but photography never lies: that is what people used to believe.
I don't think there's a Photoshop professional out there that doesn't owe a significant chunk of their expertise - and a big debt of gratitude - to Bruce Fraser. He almost single-handedly shaped the way we work with color, how we process RAW images in Photoshop, and even how we sharpen our photos.
[Postmodern photography] implies the exhaustion of the image universe: it suggests that a photographer can find more than enough images already existing in the world without the bother of making new ones.
The question occurred to me: Well, if that's so, if the Divine is ultimately formless and genderless, what's the big deal? Why all this bother? The bother is because we have no other way of speaking about the Absolute. We need forms and images. Without them we have no way of relating to the Divine. Symbol and image create a universal spiritual language. It's the language the soul understands.
I love retouching images on Photoshop.
I am myself a professional creator of images, a film-maker. And then there are the images made by the artists I collect, and I have noticed that the images I create are not so very different from theirs. Such images seem to suggest how I feel about being here, on this planet. And maybe that is why it is so exciting to live with images created by other people, images that either conflict with one's own or demonstrate similarities to them.
There is 3 key things for good photography: the camera,lighting and... Photoshop
I don't over-photoshop my images; I really don't like to do that so much.
If it doesn’t have ambiguity, don’t bother to take it. I love that, that aspect of photography - the mendacity of photography. It’s got to have some kind of peculiarity in it, or it’s not interesting to me.
Somehow Photoshop and the ease with which one can produce an image has degraded the quality of photography in general.
Why should there be only one sort of photography? I want to create images with elements of my choosing, narrative or evocative... I give myself a literary frame, I tell a story.
Photography is a tool to negotiate our idea of reality. Thus it is the responsibility of photographers to not contribute with anaesthetic images but rather to provide images that shake consciousness.
Digital photography and Photoshop have made it very easy for people to take pictures. It's a medium that allows a lot of mediocre stuff to get through.
All stories teach, whether the storyteller intends them to or not. They teach the world we create. They teach the morality we live by. They teach it much more effectively than moral precepts and instructions.
We could teach photography as a way to make a living, and best of all, somehow to get students to experience for themselves photography as a way of life.
I've seen so many photographers rush to do books the minute they start shooting, but one great thing about photography is that the images don't go away, so the more I sit with these images, the more I learn which ones have had the most impact.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!