OK, so I've already done a shot like this before (Predictable Lines), with great amount of shame and remorse, I must add, since it is far--faaar too processed to be considered photography; but dammit, it looks so--sooo good! ..and no, I'm not on any type of hallucinogenic medication. ;)
Jeremy @ Jul-26-2006
It is still an image of what was there, albeit it a processed one. I don't see the difference, philosophically, between post-processing an image, and using filters or long exposures at the time.
I like it a lot, the underside of the bridge in foreground is great and it highlights different details of the bridge than might normally present themselves.
Andy @ Jul-26-2006
Andy: I am a member of several photo clubs that consider photoshop itself a sin in photography, so the workflow of some of my images, especially this one, would be considered the anti-christ. So yes, in a sense I was pre-empting some debate with my comments. But I sincerely like the look of this, and thanks to your reassurances, I will try to do more of these--albeit with less guilt.
Cheers,
Salar @ Jul-26-2006
but after further observation its obvious that this is a photograph and not a drawing
this works very well and i don't think its very much different from a crazy B&W conversion.
so this shoudln't be criticized as "too much photoshped"
the overall look is really good..i bet this makes a great big print!
laurencepak @ Jul-26-2006
Jonathan @ Jul-27-2006
Djego @ Jul-28-2006
Local @ Jun-19-2007