How Much Do You Really Know

[IgsEMT]

I love Nik stuff. Use them often

 

[Live_free]

I used photoshop CS5 and Aperture 3. I know EVERYTHING about Aperture 3, literally. But for the photoshop thing... does anyone know everything about it? I know enough to do what I need.

 

[kkamin]

I swear sometimes I think I must be the only serious Photoshop user on the planet who loathes keyboard shortcuts and who will only use those that are absolutely necessary!

I was just watching a new Lynda tutorial on CS5 the other night? Every other second they're using a keyboard shortcut that takes twice as much time than just using the freakin mouse to click off an arrow in a box or something! It was a great tutorial otherwise but they about drove me nuts watching them mentioning them all!

My teachers in school, same deal, all of them continually harped on using those keyboard shortcuts too. I did it because they insisted, but honestly remembering and using them all just slows me down. I just cannot get my head around how is it even vaguely helpful to use all those shortcuts when you can usually do the very same thing with click of a mouse in no time flat!

To each person their own, but I have almost no use for them at all.

Makes me laugh though when I read people raving about them.

Clearly I am missing something about the charm using of keyboard shortcuts!

Keyboard shortcuts are an absolute must if you are using Photoshop in a serious way. I am looking for anything to speed up my work flow. I think like most people, by brain is ahead of what is going on screen; I'm a few moves ahead of what I am currently doing. So I just want the program to do what I want it to do as fast as it can so I can get on with it. It is incredibly annoying for me to click on drop down menus or hit tiny points within a panel by navigating my mouse or wacom around, if I can just hit COMMAND + whatever instead. I use actions too when I can.

My favorite short cut that I learned a few months ago, is how to change the brush size: Hold down control and option than click and drag the mouse. You can scale it up and down very quickly. It is faster than using the bracket keys for me and more satisfying.

And I don't know what I would do without the space bar, to move around the canvas or reposition a selection while sizing it.

---------

Google Image Result for http://www.kbcovers.com/catalog/PS-AK-ISO-QY_A.gif

I'm thinking of getting one of these for the hell of it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the OP's original question. I try to learn everything I can about a program. I'm always looking for new techniques that will expand my creative options and strengthen my skills as a digital technician. I even learn aspects of the software not specifically applicable to photographic applications, but it helps strengthen my understanding of what is possible and the workings under the hood of the software.

I recommend the Lynda.com tutorials. They are set up in easily digestible, piece meal bits, and they are very well thought out.

Good luck!

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Software is the new darkroom. Few people were masters in the darkroom, some were adequate enough to get a half decent print and most were somewhere in the middle.

It will be the same with software. Where you end up depends in large part on your own desire or not to spend the time to learn but also on what quality images you need to satisfy you as well as how much manipulation the images in your mind require.

I am not Ansel Adams in the darkroom but I am probably not too far because the images in my mind required me to be really good in the darkroom. My personal work was mostly in B&W because I never learned much about color and when I had color images I wanted to create, it was very frustrating dealing with labs who just didn't get what I was trying to do...

Learn any which way you want. It really doesn't matter much. When you get frustrated because you can't get the results you want, you will go and learn some more. No big deal.

Now, the professional side of this. For me at least. I will be opening a new studio before the end of the year and I realized that I wasn't going to learn PS that quickly... So, taking this into consideration plus the fact that I can make more money shooting than I can doing PP, I decided to hire a PP person.

The problem I had was: how do I judge someone whose work I barely understand? So I borrowed a friend's PP person to do all the technical testing of my candidates. :er:

Your post raises an interesting point. Great photographer and great photoshopper may not be overlapping skill sets... At some point photoshop becomes more about graphic skills and less about composing a good picture and taking a nice shot that was properly exposed...

I am very busy right now but I thought your response needed to be addressed.

Photoshop was never and never will be about composing a good picture or properly exposing one. If the image is badly composed and badly exposed there is no reason to spend any time with PS. And in the age of film, there would have been no reason to spend time with it in the darkroom. Period.

PP (darkroom or PS) is there to enhance a good image. Not to save a bad one. You can be a PP magician but if you don't have good images to start with, you won't have good images in the end. As the saying goes, "**** in, **** out."


As for the overlapping part of your response, no commercial photog I ever knew spent much time in a darkroom. No art photog I knew ever trusted anyone's darkroom work but his/her own. The difference is art is a non-profit venture while commercial is about making money.

If I can charge $2-3,000 a day shooting and I can pay someone $2-300 a day to do PP, why would I be doing PP?

 

[kkamin]

As for the overlapping part of your response, no commercial photog I ever knew spent much time in a darkroom. No art photog I knew ever trusted anyone's darkroom work but his/her own. The difference is art is a non-profit venture while commercial is about making money.

If I can charge $2-3,000 a day shooting and I can pay someone $2-300 a day to do PP, why would I be doing PP?

I don't know many rock star photographers, but one of my old professors, Alec Soth, blew up right after I had him as an instructor. He has permanent pieces in the MOMA now and other art museums and commanded tens of thousands for a print. If I remember correctly, he had darkroom assistants producing prints for him. I'm sure there are tons of film art photographer who like shooting but don't care for darkroom work that much and would rather direct an amazing darkroom printer to reach their ends. The same for digital photography. And there are many commercial photographers who do their own processing and retouching and take great pleasure in it.

I graduated from a fine art school and I don't think anyone there wants to be non-profit. Painters want to get famous and sell their work. Same with sculptors. Same with photographers. Do you think Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel for fun? Or Da Vinci labored over the most iconic painting in the world as a non-profit venture? Many of the great works we deem as 'true art' are commissioned works. And I'm sure the buyer participated somewhat in the vision. The master painters got paid at the end of the day just like any commercial artist.

The intentions of commercial art and fine art can differ: selling a product or idea versus selling the artist themselves. But their content can be identical and the amount of creative passion invested can be identical.

 

[rufus5150]

For photoshop, keyboard shortcuts aren't as useful

Wow, that's the oddest thing I've ever heard

Not exactly, but I'm addicted to my photoshop keyboard shortcuts.

 

[cfusionpm]

I use a lot of software, but I probably don't know ANY of them fully. I generally know enough to get accomplished what I need to (or will google tutorials on specifics). That's how I learn and grow. You can't jump into software and expect to know every in and out. It's about building a simple set of basics and getting to know the interface. There are probably a LOT of shortcuts and faster ways to do what I do, but I generally only pick up effiency tips through word of mouth (or occasionaly on forums).

As far as Lightroom goes; after originally seeing a video for the first Lightroom, I instantly fell in love and it's been at the center of my workflow ever since. The more I use it the more I pick up and learn. I would say I know 80-90% of LR2, but maybe only 25% of PS.

 

[magkelly]

It's been really interesting reading the responses here.

To those "addicted" to those shortcuts I say "Use em!" but I can't see myself becoming a shortcuts convert anytime soon. I'm definitely a major trackball mouse person. I am so much faster at clicking those drop down menus and tabs and scrolling with my ball mouse than I will likely ever be at using my keyboard it's not even funny.

I actually did memorize some of the standard ones while I was taking my Adobe classes, Photoshop and Illustrator, and I used them at the teacher's request, but I found in actual practice, for me, while working, they really did slow me down to a crawl.

But then again I'm a very fast mouser to begin with. I always seem to surprise people I work with at how fast I get things done using a mouse and the menus. That's in all applications, not just the Adobe ones. I actually forget sometimes that other people don't actually mouse as fast as I do. I go to show someone something I am doing and I usually get "Hey, slow down!" bit from them.

I watch my friends, they use keyboard shortcuts for things like turning up the volume, browsing, going to email, everything practically, things I never even thought of as being particularly keyboard related things really.

If I did that, switched, I don't think I'd never get anything done, seriously.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I graduated from a fine art school and I don't think anyone there wants to be non-profit. Painters want to get famous and sell their work. Same with sculptors. Same with photographers.

Only problem is that art photography does not sell for much. We are on a photo forum and I was talking about photo as art.

Check out KmH thread about an auction that netted $18 mils for photos. Notice the s at the end of photo? Single paintings sell for that easily enough but not a photo. Get over it or start painting.

Just a few months ago I bought a Jerry Uelsmann print for way less than $2,ooo...

 

[denawayne]

I have learned so much about Photoshop by watching tutorials on YouTube. It's amazing what you can find on there.

 

[kkamin]

I graduated from a fine art school and I don't think anyone there wants to be non-profit. Painters want to get famous and sell their work. Same with sculptors. Same with photographers.

Only problem is that art photography does not sell for much. We are on a photo forum and I was talking about photo as art.

Check out KmH thread about an auction that netted $18 mils for photos. Notice the s at the end of photo? Single paintings sell for that easily enough but not a photo. Get over it or start painting.

Just a few months ago I bought a Jerry Uelsmann print for way less than $2,ooo...

Sorry OP to digress... I agree that painters on average can command higher fees for their work.

But the number of living painters that have rock star status and can make a million off a single painting are very few. In my mind, fine artist painters and photographers are much in the same boat. A select few can live wealthy by selling their work. But most cannot live solely on selling alone; either they do some commercial work on the side, own a small related business, work as a bartender, get grants, have a benefactor, or come from legacy money. This opinion of mine applies to all fine artists. A tough market that I am too fearful to take a shot at, at this time.

The one advantage that photographers have over some other mediums is that they can create multiple copies and make multiple sales.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

You want to be a rock star, learn music. You want to make some serious money in the art world, learn to paint.

No guarantee either way but a much better chance than with photo. Wake up and smell the coffee. Or just study art history.

 

[Crashbox]

Seat time never hurts. I have fewer than 7 days experience with Photoshop Elements 11 (got it with my camera) and I haven't done hardly anything with it. At first I was confused because it's the gold standard but it looks underpowered. The thing I'm learning is that the presets are a starting point. To get the most out of the program, as I can with Gimp, it's going to take experience and time.

I've run Gimp for ten or twelve years. I finally feel like I can make headway there. Not sure it answers the question, but that's my experience. There are no magic wands when it comes to familiarity.

 

[smoke665]

am starting to use the program and I realize after viewing the tuts and videos and reading that I really need to just use the program and see what is what.

With software and cameras, you'll reach a point when you realize that the route you use to get there may be different, but the processes have a lot similarities.

 

[KmH]

Seat time never hurts. I have fewer than 7 days experience with Photoshop Elements 11 (got it with my camera) and I haven't done hardly anything with it. At first I was confused because it's the gold standard but it looks underpowered.

Yep. Photoshop Elements is way under powered. Unless something has changed I don't know about - Elements still can't do any 16-bit depth edits.

Photoshop Elements is a consumer grade product that has maybe 30% of the professional grade of Photoshop's tool, functions, and features. (Photoshop CC 2015.1 - which is Photoshop 16.1)