Photography Or Photoshop
Posted 04 April 2007 - 10:01 PM
I think there are some fantastic manipulated images on here and they have there place, maybe another section, but is it photography?
I don't want it stopped but it would be good to know what the difference was
Sea Shepherd - Support the Whales Navy
My Blog Images
Posted 07 April 2007 - 01:21 AM
Perhaps there should be some checkbox or something for this so that those with less experience can know how it was done - and not expect to shoot something out of the box like the ones that have been heavily manipulated and posted.
There are some sites where the professional photographers will rate a photo lower if there's too much PS. And they know which ones they are.
Posted 07 April 2007 - 03:59 AM
Here are some facts: 1. Photography is the visual representation of light into a condusive shape that serves a purpose, whether it be to represent reality or an artistic expression in the photographer's mind, heart, soul, take your pick.
2. All photography is manipulated. It is impossible to produce an image on a computer screen or a special piece of celulose or paper without some kind of scientific manipulation.
3. All the great master photographers have manipulated their work, be it in the darkroom or on computer, or both.
4. Many cameras (Nikons, for instance) manipulate the digital image before it gets out of the camera, or 'out of the box, per se,' making it punchier, more contrasty and saturated than reality. Many modern cameras have to be set (that's right, the controls have to be manipulated) to produce more 'real' and 'lifelike' images.
5. Anybody who shoots in digital RAW must manipulate the picture to bring it forth where others can share in the joy.
6. Anybody who shoots in JPEG gives control to their camera to manipulate the photo.
7. Any photo ever taken where there was any kind of filter on the camera has been manipulated.
8. Any black & white photo ever produced has been manipulated. Natural visual radiation comes in a wide spectrum that produces not only shades of gray, but a wide gamut of colors, too.
9. Any photo you produce and post on this sight will not (probably...no way to check) honestly look the same to everybody, because computer monitors produce colors differently. Even if they were all calibrated for color output, the brightness and contrast levels would be different from person to person.
10. More options are always better than fewer options, unless you are purposely trying to learn something through a specific limitation exercise. Artistic limitation just because it doesn't fit somebody else's personal impression of what a medium should be, that's oppression. That's a throwback to old thinking. That's anti-progression, and will always spark hot emotion from me.
God, what a rant, eh? I admit I do become emotional about things like this. Over here in the colonies, we live and die by the concept of personal freedom. Some part of every day for me is spent trying to progress art and the human race one more step by coming up with something new, be it photographic, written, or just a shared thought. When people say, no no, you must not think new thought, I shudder and remember the Dark Ages. It was painting and sculpture that violated the delicate senses of the empowered back then. Today it's digital manipulation and tools of the computer.
One of the purposes of the Blog is to learn from each other's work. Now, seriously, if somebody produces a digitally enhanced image and doesn't lie about it, what's the dishonesty? Dishonesty? There is no such thing as a dishonest image. They are what they are. They share, they remember, they teach, they preach, they explore, they grow, they take us through life in a very special way. Each in their own way.
I invite everybody to produce images as they see fit. But I do not give anybody the right to tell me I must do it their way, only their way, and never anything else but their way.
Think new thought! Dare to dream!
Posted 07 April 2007 - 08:14 AM
I agree with nearly everything said so far and would love to see more.
Some of the manipulated images are fantastic on here and I wish I could achieve something close to them. I have a lot to learn and would find it very helpful if people would say how it was done.
What I don't like is when people manipulate images to try and fool us into thinking it was what was not manipulated.
I use photoshop to tidy up images, clean dust spots etc and I have adjusted brightness and contrast where I have not controlled my exposure expertly in the first place (photographing Red Kites flying in strong sunlight).
If you are trying to create something that was different to what you saw with the naked eye or thought you saw, then you should say so. I don't know what the answer to this is.
Our eyes are alot cleverer than the camera and adjust to light. So I can look at a dramatic sky and then look at the landscape and my mind see's a very stunning image which the camera cannot duplicate without adjustment. I just feel that lot of lanscapes have been over manipulated and it is a shame.
I definitely don't want to dictate what people should do.
Sea Shepherd - Support the Whales Navy
My Blog Images
Posted 07 April 2007 - 01:53 PM
I actually lost sleep last night worrying that I'd come off too harsh on my rant. See, I do that, and I sincerely apologize if I hurt any feelings.
For my part, I'll try to always honestly present techniques I use to get to the final image. I enjoy seeing how other photographers produce their work, and maybe somebody will get some ideas from something I do.
Please accept a blanket future apology for anything I fail to mention due to my memory limitations.
Posted 16 April 2007 - 02:54 PM
Other photography sites I have seen do mark down too much manipulation, they also only allow images in competitions that have the minimum of manipulation, eg clarify tool, unsharp mask, saturation and cropping, this then shows the photographer knows his camera and can produce work without having to manipulate it beyond recognition.
Personally I would like to see another category for manipulated images, and competitions being restricted to the minimum manipulation. This is only my opinion fwiw.
Posted 11 June 2007 - 06:51 AM
I also agree, a photo should be just that a PHOTO, i use photoshop myself on some images and you can really create great stuff, but i would also like to see 2 different galleries available, one for the untoched photos and one for edited work.
Just a thought Phil
Posted 26 June 2007 - 07:34 AM
I would like to say this without sounding too dumb, or rather un-experienced when it comes to the subject that has arisen. I have to admit with ALL comments made in this post and being new I would like to add a few recomendations... First & foremaost is NO restrictions have been posted as what I have read since first joining less than 2 wks ago & IF there is to be some on how a photo is fixed, then this issue needs to be addressed & posted so that new members will know & follow guidelines set forth.
I will admit that I HAVE used Photshop BUT for increasing/decreasing size & for crouping, as for anything else one can & might do I have yet to master or use.
Posted 16 September 2007 - 09:49 AM
Here are my thoughts and practices.
I shoot mostly film. I do my own developing/printing.
When I want to share something online or use it in digital format, I scan in the negative and I work with the digital file.
A lot of times, the negative is scratched or filled with dirt, thanks to the oh so clean water of my college.
In that case, I go back and clean the negative in PS.
Another problem I find, is that sometimes either the film/lens/developing of a said batch produces film that doesn't have a lot of contrast of brightness, in which case I fix that up in PhotoShop.
Any more manipulation and I state it. I also make sure I post in the appropriate places.
I think the general frustration is not the fact that people manipulate their images to make them look pretty, but the fact that they manipulate them and do not STATE it.
Posted 16 September 2007 - 04:36 PM
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users