Speaking of the new issue TRJ........

......as I opened its hallowed pages the other day, my nostrils were greated with the bitter-sweet smell of exceptional photo quality, and mine eyes were bathed. The scent of high grade photo developers/processors and print set chemicals. That scent that long since left the shores of our fine printing facilities, leaving our pages a little less resolute and still-lives a little less impact. I would enscounce myself in that smell, for what it means. Is TRJ printing overseas now, or have they found a new printer that is willing to handle the chemical dump costs to print superb quality? I don't know, I was taken agast by the quality of this issue.

 

WOW!!! From that description I was expecting some "adult content"


Frank

 

Been printed overseas for years.

 

Really? Didn't know that. It just seemed different. Interesting, thanks.

 

I've been a subscriber of TRJ for six years, if i could only have one publication to read, that would be it.
But, I just got the annual holiday poster,the one that comes in the mailing tube.
What is that all about? not the car ,the problem is i wish i could see it as it's supposed to look.
Is it just me or are there others who really dont care for that type of photography?
They did this a coupe of issues back on coverage of the Lone Star Roundup.
I'm not mad,far from that.

 

haven't seen the annual poster, got a pic of it?
I wasn't meaning photo composition as much as depth and richness of color inherent in certain types of processing/printing.

 

Dont have a picture.
What they did was make it intentionally grainey.There probably is a name for this process.
Some of the camera types on here will know about this

 

nothing worse than someone thinking they know photography and mucking around in photoshop.

I know CRAP about photography and less about photoshop..BUT i know for SURE i wanna see pictures of the whole car not a bumper or hubcap.......and the clearer the better. the closer you can make it so that it looks like it would if i was standing in front of it the better.

 

I used to be a photographer, I know what your talking about AND I HATE THAT GRAINEY, DIGITIZED, CRAP. In my opinion it is usually done to cover up poor focus/shutter speed/lighting skills on something that might have a somewhat interesting composition. And Photoshop will only go so far. And in my opinion digital has degraded the art of photography. Yes digital has its place as a recording tool - if you just want to have a record of an event or person or thing. Their convenient, easy and quick. But if you want to get creative, GET ANALOG. Now you have Joe Schmo trying to be edgy, with out ever developing their own sense of direction, ability, or compsositional integrity. And left with thus. If you want to get real, underdeveloped quality, YOU HAVE TO UNDERDEVELOP. Digitizing will not substitute.

Off my pulpit now......