Anyone's a photographer, if they can photoshop

[Scatterbrained]

I have a new development on this. I met someone that already picked up lightroom masters collection (I think that cost like a grand?) and they don't even have a camera yet. Talk about preplanning...
Nothing against them either, im sure they will be great in photography I just thought it was kind of backwards..


edit: oh, friend of my wifes. Nice woman. suppose I was just surprised. she showed me the program already has it installed in her computer..

I assume you're referring to the Creative Suite Master Collection? Oddly Lr isn't included in the Master Collection, but it doesn't matter now with CC. Are you sure she ponied up the money for CS6 or did she just purchase the subscription service?

 

[bribrius]

I have a new development on this. I met someone that already picked up lightroom masters collection (I think that cost like a grand?) and they don't even have a camera yet. Talk about preplanning...
Nothing against them either, im sure they will be great in photography I just thought it was kind of backwards..


edit: oh, friend of my wifes. Nice woman. suppose I was just surprised. she showed me the program already has it installed in her computer..

I assume you're referring to the Creative Suite Master Collection? Oddly Lr isn't included in the Master Collection, but it doesn't matter now with CC. Are you sure she ponied up the money for CS6 or did she just purchase the subscription service?

full program.
edit: well im assuming so. she said it went for a grand. I kind peeped through it, talked about the tutorials which she thought would come in handy. it seemed to me like the full thing and you are correct. It was creative suite master collection or edition or something to that effect. My photoshop knowledge is lacking. Looked interesting I didn't really get a chance to play around with it. I was really just a little surprised, that's all.

 

[SpikeyJohnson]

back to the main o.p. statement.

without the digital and post processing I wonder how many "photographers" would no longer be doing photography. Where as some dropped out of photography with the development of digital imaging and photoshop even more seemed to have picked it up. Lets face it it's easier, cheaper and much more forgiving of mistakes.

Lately I find myself really delving into photoshop quite a bit. Normally I just go through LR5 but since I got a tablet and pen I love PS. I sometimes find it more fun to peer at the photo's as I work on them later, fixing imperfections in things, cleaning, recoloring, drawing and accentuating. I have used film and darkroom as well. I liked them but it was so expensive for me to play with.

So some day's for me, I like the "Get it right in Camera". Other day's I love to get into photoshop and play. I think I like the "Get it right..." when I'm shooting many photo's for an occasion where as with photoshop it is more of a single item up to like 10-20 photo's at most. I will play with photo's for hours in PS when I feel like it.

 

[nzmacro]

Here's a swallow in flight, SOOC. It's great I know. And believe it or not, I have many just as good as this one.
But, lets see if someone can Photoshop it to look like one of Danny's

Leave me out of it I'm on the sideline just reading through this

What PS or the equivalents can do, is make a great shot ........ superb. But and its a big but, it can't save a shot that is already dead and should be buried. Every single shot I've taken and probably most on here by the looks, goes though a certain process to make the image look as good as it can be as we see it. No way on this earth am I going to tell you what some of us get up to

These are all right out of the box with no editing at all .......... trust me

All just straight from the garden and camera. Untouched I tell ya.

Danny.

 

[nzmacro]

Here's a swallow in flight, SOOC. It's great I know. And believe it or not, I have many just as good as this one.
But, lets see if someone can Photoshop it to look like one of Danny's

Its not too bad Jas, a bit of sharpening and cropping a litlle more to the thirds, yeah not bad. Nice shot Jason.



Danny.

 

[Raj_55555]

These are all right out of the box with no editing at all .......... trust me

All just straight from the garden and camera. Untouched I tell ya.

Danny.

Come on Danny, stop lying! You've clearly added the watermark in post .

 

[nzmacro]

Oops, I did as well. I forgot about that Raj or maybe I have an app for the camera that does it on auto

 

[Raj_55555]

Oops, I did as well. I forgot about that Raj or maybe I have an app for the camera that does it on auto

I should get one of those apps :lmao: :lmao:

 

[480sparky]

Oops, I did as well. I forgot about that Raj or maybe I have an app for the camera that does it on auto

I just email all my photos to Chuck Norris. As soon as he looks at them, the watermarks appear all by themselves.

 

[Raj_55555]

Well, the results are in. He hardly took 10 pics, and only these 3 were remotely usable. I don't know what I expected
I did as much PP as I could in LR, but going to CS seemed overkill for these shots.

 

[Bamps]

I don't know, that second one looks pretty good. Off the wall, ( or should that be IN the wall), and different, yet clear on the boys there. The other two, not so much.

 

[bribrius]

I don't know, that second one looks pretty good. Off the wall, ( or should that be IN the wall), and different, yet clear on the boys there. The other two, not so much.

1 keeper in 10 actually isn't too bad, in comparison to some...
Especially from a guy who doesn't pick up cameras that doesn't like photography. He might be a natural

 

[AlanKlein]

You can't Photoshop perspective, content, interest, good lighting, etc. That's why so many shots that have been heavily processed still stink.

 

[limr]

Okay, I hope this doesn't sound too bad, but...that kid on the bottom 'bunk' in the second picture? His head is sorta freaking me out. I'm sure there's a weird thing going on with the perspective that is creating a strange optical illusion, but his head and forehead just look GINORMOUS compared to his facial features, which look very small. Plus, the angle of the arm under his head makes the arm look shorter than normal - like there's no elbow or even wrist. Just goes straight into the hand. And it looks like he's got make-up on or something like that - very smooth skin. It almost looks like a doll head on a real body.

 

[Raj_55555]

I don't know, that second one looks pretty good. Off the wall, ( or should that be IN the wall), and different, yet clear on the boys there. The other two, not so much.

Yup! That's what I told him, it was the only one that looked decent to me, going a bit to the left and keeping the camera straight would have helped but he did a good job .

1 keeper in 10 actually isn't too bad, in comparison to some...
Especially from a guy who doesn't pick up cameras that doesn't like photography. He might be a natural

I might have stated the numbers a bit incorrectly. What I meant was he hardly took pictures of 10 different types, for the second one there were about 12-13 blurry ones (like last one here), with this one in between somewhere. I'm not criticizing him though, he did a nice job I'd say. Just that I got him to admit it was tougher when he was actually trying to make a good photo conciously