I stayed out of the fracas between Mike Johnston and Moose a few days ago. Moose had taken one of MJ's photos, manipulated it and then displayed both the original and the "enhanced" version side by side and proceeded to make an argument that MJ was processing images too flat. MJ pushed back and said he liked em that way. And that they were not "too flat" from his point of view. And that was the way he intended them. All of which started me thinking about the way I process my own images and display them on the web. My knee jerk reaction was that my own work looked "better" if it was snappier and more saturated. My black and whites better with more "clarity." But as I mulled this over and over in my head I remembered something my father used to say to me when I was so, so sure I was right and whoever I was arguing with was dead wrong. "Consider this..." he would say, "What if the other guy is right?"
Which got me thinking even harder. I grabbed a few favorite files and started looking at them made softer, harder, sharper, more diffuse, brighter, darker and, of course, snappier. By the end I was more confused than when I started.
Then I remembered B's ever-present mantra about.....everything: "All Things In Moderation."
And I remembered that all through her career as an award-winning art director and graphic designer for some of the USA's biggest businesses she always steered toward the middle ground. Not "boring" middle but "accessible" middle. It was nearly always work that pleased her design sensibilities, spoke to consumers and delivered for clients.
Maybe that is a target I should be aiming for in my own post production. Timeless versus cutting edge. Comfortable instead of trendy. Happy instead of strident. It's a thought anyway.
Really though, what if the other guy is right? Can you change your mind?