<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
    xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Digital typography vs photography (via Flickr)</title>
	<link>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/</link>
	<description>a blog and podcast dedicated to discussing text arts forms</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 22:25:11 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	
	 <copyright>Writer Response Theory 2004-2005</copyright>
    <managingEditor>wrt@writerresponsetheory.org (Writer Response Theory)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>wrt@writerresponsetheory.org</webMaster>

    <category>Talk Radio</category>
   <itunes:category text="Arts &amp; Entertainment" ><itunes:category text="Entertainment" />
</itunes:category>
<itunes:category text="Education" ><itunes:category text="Higher Education" />
</itunes:category>
<itunes:category text="Technology" ><itunes:category text="Developers" />
</itunes:category>
	
    <itunes:subtitle>Comment-cast: Digital typography vs photography (via Flickr)</itunes:subtitle>
    <itunes:summary>Comment-cast: Digital typography vs photography (via Flickr)</itunes:summary>
    
    <itunes:author>Writer Response Theory</itunes:author>    
    <itunes:owner>
        <itunes:name>Writer Response Theory</itunes:name>
        <itunes:email>wrt@writerresponsetheory.org</itunes:email>
    </itunes:owner>
    
    <itunes:image href="http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/iTWRTl.JPG" />
    

	<item>
		<title>by: Geoff Bridge Wedding Photography</title>
		<link>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-266376</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:18:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-266376</guid>
					<description>I feel that photography is art in itself, a captured expression or moment in time can be precious and in the same light altering or manipulating an image can produce beautiful pieces of art!!

Interesting post, will bookmark this and stay in touch thank you

Geoff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I feel that photography is art in itself, a captured expression or moment in time can be precious and in the same light altering or manipulating an image can produce beautiful pieces of art!!</p>
<p>Interesting post, will bookmark this and stay in touch thank you</p>
<p>Geoff
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			                <itunes:author>Geoff Bridge Wedding Photography</itunes:author>
        <itunes:subtitle>I feel that photography is art in itself, a captured expression or moment in time can be precious and in ...</itunes:subtitle>
        <itunes:summary>I feel that photography is art in itself, a captured expression or moment in time can be precious and in ...</itunes:summary>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: albertjames</title>
		<link>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-240399</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:01:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-240399</guid>
					<description>Barthes claimed in Camera Lucida that photography has a certain hold on us based on an ontological claim - that a photograph represents a real interaction with real light at some real point in the past. Whatever happens in the subsequent madness of development, editing, digitizing, morphing, or what-have-you, a photograph (in as much as it is one) bears this relationship to past light.
----------------
albertjames
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.drivenwide.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Social Media Marketing&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barthes claimed in Camera Lucida that photography has a certain hold on us based on an ontological claim - that a photograph represents a real interaction with real light at some real point in the past. Whatever happens in the subsequent madness of development, editing, digitizing, morphing, or what-have-you, a photograph (in as much as it is one) bears this relationship to past light.<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br />
albertjames<br />
<a href="http://www.drivenwide.com" rel="nofollow">Social Media Marketing</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			                <itunes:author>albertjames</itunes:author>
        <itunes:subtitle>Barthes claimed in Camera Lucida that photography has a certain hold on us based on an ontological claim - that ...</itunes:subtitle>
        <itunes:summary>Barthes claimed in Camera Lucida that photography has a certain hold on us based on an ontological claim - that ...</itunes:summary>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Kristi</title>
		<link>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-232699</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-232699</guid>
					<description>This is to comment Longview:

Yes most professional photographers will tell you that editing an image in any other way besides cropping the photograph, is &quot;ruining&quot; it.  To them, its no longer a true photo.  Its now a piece of art.

I dont agree.  And I will outwardly admit that I have on more than one ocassion edited a photos colors, brightness, etc.  And to me its still the same photo it was before, now its just better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is to comment Longview:</p>
<p>Yes most professional photographers will tell you that editing an image in any other way besides cropping the photograph, is &#8220;ruining&#8221; it.  To them, its no longer a true photo.  Its now a piece of art.</p>
<p>I dont agree.  And I will outwardly admit that I have on more than one ocassion edited a photos colors, brightness, etc.  And to me its still the same photo it was before, now its just better.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			                <itunes:author>Kristi</itunes:author>
        <itunes:subtitle>This is to comment Longview:

Yes most professional photographers will tell you that editing an image in any other way besides ...</itunes:subtitle>
        <itunes:summary>This is to comment Longview:

Yes most professional photographers will tell you that editing an image in any other way besides ...</itunes:summary>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Longview Photography</title>
		<link>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-231914</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:18:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-231914</guid>
					<description>Interesting thought on this....

So do some people feel as though digitally manipulating photos is ruining the art? I often wonder... though working in certain formats creates art in itself...


Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting thought on this&#8230;.</p>
<p>So do some people feel as though digitally manipulating photos is ruining the art? I often wonder&#8230; though working in certain formats creates art in itself&#8230;</p>
<p>Thanks
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			                <itunes:author>Longview Photography</itunes:author>
        <itunes:subtitle>Interesting thought on this....

So do some people feel as though digitally manipulating photos is ruining the art? I often wonder... ...</itunes:subtitle>
        <itunes:summary>Interesting thought on this....

So do some people feel as though digitally manipulating photos is ruining the art? I often wonder... ...</itunes:summary>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Thomas May Photography</title>
		<link>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-208586</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerresponsetheory.org/wordpress/2006/01/27/digital-typography-vs-photography-via-flickr/#comment-208586</guid>
					<description>It's an interesting point. That a photograph has to represent a &quot;real&quot; interaction with real light at some real point. However, I feel the point is largely moot. In all photography, even analogue, the picture subject must go through some type of medium before reaching us. In this way, even if the source was real, the photo result is already different. Editing or producing photographs digitally is no different that using shooting analogue photos different settings to capture a certain mood. Still a good article though, thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s an interesting point. That a photograph has to represent a &#8220;real&#8221; interaction with real light at some real point. However, I feel the point is largely moot. In all photography, even analogue, the picture subject must go through some type of medium before reaching us. In this way, even if the source was real, the photo result is already different. Editing or producing photographs digitally is no different that using shooting analogue photos different settings to capture a certain mood. Still a good article though, thanks.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			                <itunes:author>Thomas May Photography</itunes:author>
        <itunes:subtitle>It's an interesting point. That a photograph has to represent a "real" interaction with real light at some real point. ...</itunes:subtitle>
        <itunes:summary>It's an interesting point. That a photograph has to represent a "real" interaction with real light at some real point. ...</itunes:summary>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

