Photoshop Debate

[musicaleCA]

You guys are still going on about this? Yeesh. Cloud hit it on the head; you want to put limits on your work, that's fine, just don't bother me about it and don't accuse me of "cheating" nor play the self-righteous-holier-than-thou card.

Anyone want some?

 

[Village Idiot]

Photoshop = the new dark room.

/thread.

 

[Rekd]

/rant-on/

What a stupid argument.:meh:

That's like saying a Formula 1 driver isn't really a racer because he's got computers helping control the car. Really, how stupid is that?

Professional photographers have been post processing their stuff for as long as we've known how to project an image on a piece of film. From using flash bulbs to double exposure to cropping to adjusting lighting, brightness and contrast to air-brushing etc etc etc.

Seriously, people that are crying about "professionals" post processing their work need to STHU already. Unless, of course, you're signing the checks, then feel free to get sub-par work for your buck. :twak:

/rant-off/

 

[Dao]

This is just a "TOOL" ...

Word processor vs typewriter?
You are using Word to type your essay with automatic spell check and grammar check?? You are cheating!!


Regular wood saw/Axe vs chain saw?
I can chop this tree with my hand tools!!


Horse vs car?
What?? You said you have a green automobile?? Look at mine!! 0 MPG

 

[oxcart]

I'm not fond of PS. It's taking away something of the art of taking photographs. I understand that post processing is not a new idea and that's not what I mean.

- PS is too easy; the automatic adjustments don't require any skill at all
- pictures can be rescued in PS
- generally, it seems like less care is being taken with photos

I remember years ago taking pics with my dad. We'd go out to the coast very early in the morning to make the best of the early morning light, especially if there was bad weather expected. Now; just crank up the contrast of a mediocre shot in PS - job done.

 

[Rekd]

I understand that post processing is not a new idea and that's not what I mean.

- PS is too easy; the automatic adjustments don't require any skill at all
- pictures can be rescued in PS
- generally, it seems like less care is being taken with photos

Wait. What?

- Photoshop is too easy? It doesn't require any skill at all? *cough*Bull*****cough*

- Yeah, pictures CAN be rescued. That's a GOOD thing.

- Generally, it seems like MORE care is being taken with photos.

Wow. Just wow.

(For the record, most of the photos I post here and on flickr are cropped and re-sized only. Very few get run through Gimp unless I'm giving/selling them to someone else.)

 

[oxcart]

<<blank>>

 

[Village Idiot]

I understand that post processing is not a new idea and that's not what I mean.

- PS is too easy; the automatic adjustments don't require any skill at all
- pictures can be rescued in PS
- generally, it seems like less care is being taken with photos

Wait. What?

- Photoshop is too easy? It doesn't require any skill at all? *cough*Bull*****cough*

- Yeah, pictures CAN be rescued. That's a GOOD thing.

- Generally, it seems like MORE care is being taken with photos.

Wow. Just wow.

Yes PS is too easy. Did I stutter? I didn't say it doesn't require any skill at all. More care is being taken with photographs, not with photography.

Running auto levels is easy. Doing more advanced editing is not. It doesn't take 2 seconds to touch up and do effective and non over bearing skin enchancements on portrait work. Photos can be recovered in the dark room as well. Film has a higher dynamic range. Using film is easy. You drop it off at the lab and have them process it for you. That doesn't require any skill at all.

Lighting takes skill. I've seen some amazing photos of digital and film medium that have had very little processing and have had amazing lighting and planning to acheive what looks like something that would be unacheivable. Salvador Dali anyone? I'm sorry uncle Burnie processes 100 photos in a minute with Elements and that makes mad, but real photographer still put time, effort, and thought into their work regardless of how the final image gets to where it's going.

Stop being self righteous. Stop making assumptions. Stop stereotyping people.

 

[Rekd]

Stop being self righteous. Stop making assumptions. Stop stereotyping people.

Not bad advice, for an idiot. :lmao:

 

[oxcart]

Stop being self righteous. Stop making assumptions. Stop stereotyping people.

I'm not doing any of those things. I don't appreciate one of my comments being responded to with 'bull****'. Either we're having a civilised discussion or we're not.

 

[HannahRebekah]

Photo editing take a LOT of skill and practice. If you could see the difference between my noobishly edited photos and now, wow, there's a big difference. And I still have a lot to learn.

Personally, I think that if you can edit a photo and make it appear better than straight from the camera, especially if you've done it in a way that no one can tell you did, you've done a great job. Changing colors, etc. is fine, that's creative liberty and it can be so much fun, but somewhere along the line, someone's going to have a problem with/not like it. If you're doing it for yourself or for a customer, though, then those are the only people you have to satisfy.

 

[Buckster]

- PS is too easy; the automatic adjustments don't require any skill at all

The automatic adjustments made by the lab on film for the past several generations didn't require any skill at all either. But that's what you got unless you took charge of the processing and printing yourself, which has evolved into Photoshop. Welcome to the 21st century.

- pictures can be rescued in PS

Some can. Some can't. It doesn't do much good to polish a turd.

- generally, it seems like less care is being taken with photos

By noobs, wannabes, soccer moms and Uncle Joes. Real photographers still take care to do it right.

I remember years ago taking pics with my dad. We'd go out to the coast very early in the morning to make the best of the early morning light, especially if there was bad weather expected. Now; just crank up the contrast of a mediocre shot in PS - job done.

That makes no sense. Cranking up the contrast will not give the impression of early morning light, especially not with those harsh noon shadows blasting down on the subjects.

 

[Overread21]

- generally, it seems like less care is being taken with photos

By who?
Its a legitimate question! You see the digital camera has opened up photography to the masses, its affordable to a resaonable level and the internet has allowed the masses to also distribute their work on a global scale. I see a lot of people say that the "quality in photography has gone" "People only like (badly done) HDR" and many many other similar comments - but that is not showing photography as a whole, it is just showing the people they are looking at. Spend a little longe ron the net or just flickr and you can find many many hobbyists who have taken photography very seriously and to very difficult areas and levels - many because they can at last affored to purchase the good/pro level equipment now.

Further PS has opened up a new form of torture - that of hte 100% crop - of viewing ones photos at 100% - 200% heck even more than that! For new keen photographers that is a whole new level of viewing shots and I would argue far more are trying to take even more care with their work than in the past

 

[oxcart]

<<blank>>

 

[Buckster]

- PS is too easy; the automatic adjustments don't require any skill at all

The automatic adjustments made by the lab on film for the past several generations didn't require any skill at all either. But that's what you got unless you took charge of the processing and printing yourself, which has evolved into Photoshop. Welcome to the 21st century.

We were specifically comparing post processing in PS with post processing in the dark room.

Then we're not talking about "automatic adjustments". It's unreasonable to compare "automatic adjustments" in PS to darkroom work.


Some can. Some can't. It doesn't do much good to polish a turd.

Depends on how good you are at polishing.

Not much. A crap photo is a crap photo. Nonetheless, if someone manages to turn a crap photo into gold, how is that any skin off your nose and, moreover, do you think it can be done with "automatic adjustments"?


By noobs, wannabes, soccer moms and Uncle Joes. Real photographers still take care to do it right.

I understand this. But there's a balance; as photography becomes more accessible, are technical principles being picked up?

You tell me. Are the photos being made by the top photographers in the country today showing that they've picked up the technical principles of photography? I think they have. I think it's still being taught in photography schools everywhere as well. I've seen scores of people coming here every month saying they're just starting a photography course and are required to get a film camera so that they can learn the principles. What does that tell you?

I remember years ago taking pics with my dad. We'd go out to the coast very early in the morning to make the best of the early morning light, especially if there was bad weather expected. Now; just crank up the contrast of a mediocre shot in PS - job done.

That makes no sense. Cranking up the contrast will not give the impression of early morning light, especially not with those harsh noon shadows blasting down on the subjects.

I was speaking more specifically about the impact of the clouds and the idea of waiting for the lighting of a good shot.

It still doesn't make any sense. You've oversimplified your argument by saying that PS is simple and using "automatic adjustments" as the standard for that argument. Then you compare a shot done in early morning light with cranking up the contrast of a mediocre shot in PS, and there's simply no comparison to actually be made between them.

Comments in red.

Comments in blue. I prefer the actual quote tags however. You do know how to work those, right?