-->
-->
Lots of anger, angst and strong opinions in general these
days about people slapping a filter on their photos, calling it cool, and
sending them off, onto the web.
But here’s the deal: the other two major areas of visual
media—movies and TV—have been using “filters” for a long time. Expect they call it color grading, and
they even give it its own professional name, a “colorist.” It’s crucial work that contributes an indispensable
mood to the story, right up there with the lighting and the acting.
So why do some photographers react against this creative
tool so vehemently? Maybe it’s a fiction vs nonfiction truth thing, dominated by photojournalists wanting
the truth. Or maybe it’s purely
just a sticking to tradition kind of thing—Avedon and Cartier-Bresson didn’t
use filters, so neither should we.
But whatever the reason, the revolution has arrived. People view far move movies and TV than
still photos, and as a result their visual vocabulary now includes color grading. Even the reality show, “Gold Rush,” uses somewhat
extreme color grading in its intro., and even in some of it’s footage, I think—and
that show is not exactly aimed at the hipster crowd. It’s as meat
and potatoes as it gets.
Just about everyone expects the extra dimension of emotion that
color grading provides to stills as well as motion, and I think that’s a good
thing.
