Les Sable d'Olonne was experiencing its usual wheather in the Autum of 2007 when this photo was taken.
In the past it would, in order to retain the detail, have had to be taken on a large format camera,
but not today.

Two photographs taken with a Nikon D70, using the onboard exposure system, set on manual, to produce RAW files.
The two photos were first processed in DxO Optics to correct the 'faults' in the lens and the D70, modified slightly for colour temperature and exposure before being stitched in Photoshop and cropped.
This left me with around a 10mp image that would have produced a competent 20" wide picture.

However what I find really wonderful about this picture is that it forces my eyes and brain to work as they would with a real scene.
They did not see the whole picture, they concentrated on a small portion and the rest just became vague.

The important techniques, in retrospect, were producing a picture which 'dimmed' as it moved away from the central action and having a lot of interest telling the whole story.

The point I take from this is that the important aspect of the photo has nothing to do with all the editing techniques.
My question therefore is are the techniques overtaking the photography?

>