Why is it that...

ksmattfish · Jul 26, 2004

StvShoop said:
"no editing"

What is the fundamental difference between picking up a beer can at the location, so it's not in the photo, and editing it out later in Adobe PS? I guess maybe the photographer is throwing that can away, thereby helping clean up litter. But what that has to do with photography, I don't know.

Bosscat · Jul 26, 2004

Somehow i just think that digital manipulation is alot like drivers aids on cars.......it is a dumbing down of society.

Is not being there at the right time......and knowing how to use the camera,the film and the light what it is all about?

When i nail a film pic spot on.......it is one of the best feelings i have

Digital Matt · Jul 26, 2004

Bosscat said:
Somehow i just think that digital manipulation is alot like drivers aids on cars.......it is a dumbing down of society.

Is not being there at the right time......and knowing how to use the camera,the film and the light what it is all about?

When i nail a film pic spot on.......it is one of the best feelings i have

Ansel Adams was there at the right time, and I'm pretty sure he knew how to use a camera, and he still relied heavily on darkroom techniques. The creativity doesn't have to end after you've "nailed" the shot, in film or digital.

ksmattfish · Jul 26, 2004

Bosscat said:
Somehow i just think that digital manipulation is alot like drivers aids on cars.......it is a dumbing down of society.

Is not being there at the right time......and knowing how to use the camera,the film and the light what it is all about?

When i nail a film pic spot on.......it is one of the best feelings i have

I shoot BW in cameras that don't take batteries, and develop and print my own stuff. I could argue that 35mm roll film, photo labs, and auto-focus are "dumbing-down". There are some old farts who would demand you hand coat your own glass plates, and shoot huge negs so you could contact print if you want to be a "real" photographer. :wink:

Digital photography is still about being there at the right time, knowing how to use the gear, the light, etc... Adobe PS can't save a bad photo. A good photographer is still going to nail the shot, no matter what equipment they are using.

Bosscat · Jul 26, 2004

But how many times do we hear the cry "Photoshop" today???

There is a big difference between darkroom work and photoshopping in what can be done to the original image.

Jeff Canes · Jul 26, 2004

voodoocat said:
A lens flare added in photoshop does not look realistic so to most people (including me) it just looks stupid. Compositing images is not an easy chore. It takes a lot of work to make a believable photo. When it looks fake, it looks cheesy IMO.

I agree with voodoo 100%, also IMO computers, software, and digital cameras are marketed as if the user needs no skills, IMO that is the problem with most digital manipulation, I am not in digital manipulation myself, not because I am purist, I just suck at PS

Soulreaver · Jul 26, 2004

Since you are in digital , I see nothing wrong with filtering , converting , distorting, morphing, adding or deleting things from your image to create a picture.It can still be art.
And ease of use and enhanced productivity cant be argued with.

With that said, I dont think thats quite the same thing as composing a shot, fotometering just so and waiting for the decisive moment, that instant when you get the perfect shot.

I do not have a digital yet, so I hardly use PS, but I will as soon as I get a digital.

ksmattfish · Jul 26, 2004

Bosscat said:
There is a big difference between darkroom work and photoshopping in what can be done to the original image.

Shhhh...don't let Jerry Uelsman know.

Edit: whoops, that's Uelsmann, with 2 'n'

drlynn · Jul 26, 2004

ksmattfish said:
Bosscat said:

There is a big difference between darkroom work and photoshopping in what can be done to the original image.

Click to expand...

Shhhh...don't let Jerry Uelsman know.

Edit: whoops, that's Uelsmann, with 2 'n'

Matt, that's exactly who I was thinking of. Or Wynn Bullock.

Soulreaver · Jul 26, 2004

ksmattfish said:
There are some old farts who would demand you hand coat your own glass plates, and shoot huge negs so you could contact print if you want to be a "real" photographer.

What?U mean you dont coat your own glasses? :shock:

ksmattfish said:
Adobe PS can't save a bad photo.

Ah, but it can.Theres no limit to what you can do to a digital picture, in way of filters, editing, morphing and the like.Whos to draw the line?
Nonetheless, the end result matters, as well as the means of achieving it.
Whatever pleases you.

jadin · Jul 26, 2004

Bosscat said:
But how many times do we hear the cry "Photoshop" today???

There is a big difference between darkroom work and photoshopping in what can be done to the original image.

That's only because all of a sudden every digital camera owner and their grandma thinks they need photoshop to be effective with their photography. So people who would never normally edit so drastically, all of a sudden have an extremely powerful manipulating tool at their fingertips and many times go too far making the image either 'fake' or 'digital art' rather than a photograph.

I think that's the biggest reason you hear about it so much. I remember back in the 90's when I was trying to get employed for a web design firm, and they required a couple year's photoshop experience, it wasn't common to have that. But now on photography websites you hear it more often than "aperture".

Digital photographies fault? Not a chance. It's from keeping up with the Jones. Plain and simple.

ksmattfish · Jul 26, 2004

Soulreaver said:
Theres no limit to what you can do to a digital picture

Adobe PS cannot fabricate information lost due to under-exposure. It cannot change the point of view. It cannot include parts of the composition that were excluded by the original composition. It can't even get up in the morning, grab the camera and go out photographing

Graphics editing software is a wonderful tool (coming from a film/darkroom geek), but it really can't make someone a better photographer. It's just another tool that a photographer can choose to use or not. Many of the things that Adobe PS can do can be done on film in the original shot also. It just takes the forethought. With Adobe you can tinker at will after the photo was taken.

"Who draws the line?" The only person who can, the individual photographer.

On the other side, I would encourage any photog who's always used digital to try out film, and learn more about it. Print your own photograph in the traditional darkroom at least once. Learn to use a camera that doesn't take batteries. These experiences will teach you things about photography that will improve your digital work.

ksmattfish · Jul 26, 2004

Soulreaver said:
What?U mean you dont coat your own glasses? :shock:

Someday I will.

voodoocat · Jul 27, 2004

Bosscat said:
Somehow i just think that digital manipulation is alot like drivers aids on cars.......it is a dumbing down of society.

Is not being there at the right time......and knowing how to use the camera,the film and the light what it is all about?

When i nail a film pic spot on.......it is one of the best feelings i have

So would you say that using an emulsion like Velvia that gives ultra saturated colors is dumbing down photographers? Most changes in the digital darkroom are very small. Subtle changes to contrast and saturation make a big impact on the final image. It's no different than throwing velvia in the camera when that is the effect I am after.

Photoshop doesn't change photography. You still have to compose the image, choose the focal length, expose it properly and most important capture the right lighting.

Like I've said before in this discussion...
You can polish a turd but it's still a piece of ****.

Soulreaver · Jul 27, 2004

ksmattfish said:
Soulreaver said:

Theres no limit to what you can do to a digital picture

Click to expand...

Adobe PS cannot fabricate information lost due to under-exposure. It cannot change the point of view. It cannot include parts of the composition that were excluded by the original composition. It can't even get up in the morning, grab the camera and go out photographing

I dont know about PS, but as long as there is a scrap of information in the image you can bring it out.The kind of manipulation you see in the movie No Way Out is very much possible,albeit not in PS, perhaps.
And you can add /distort ,change color balance.You can also use 2 or more pics to compose one image.
Thats in no way a put down of digital, since you can do more than you can with film.And you can have as much fun in PS as you can in the darkroom.
But darkroom is my thing now.