- There are too many people relying too heavily on photoshop and not getting it right at the shoot - Doesn’t matter how much you edit the shot the photography is always there - Anymore than about 20 minutes editing and it’s a manipulation
That sounds odd I know.. 2 of them clash. But the line must be found sooner rather than later. Using programs like Photoshop to touch up an image just to improve say lighting etc is fine, but changing an image vastly in such a way as you might as well have just started from scratch and drew it on there, leaving the camera to rot on the side.
People should just rely on their own skills and make minor modifications in editing software rather than using major edits to improve a poor quality image.
Minor edits (like auto-levels as a basic example) in quantity are alright, so long as it doesn't look totally 'shopped, its fine. Done in such a way that you wouldn't really notice it.
I'm a painter and use a camera as a tool for documentation but I can understand the purist's viewpoint. This is just my 2 cents but I believe that once you begin to manipulate a photograph for any reason it enters the realm of art. You're then adjusting the image based on artistic choices that are intuitive and instinctual. The "art" of the photograph lies in the anticipation and education of the photographer, in that much of the visualization occurs long before the shutter is activated. The photograph is simply the result of his or her thought process.
I replied "Doesnt matter how much you edit the shot the photography is always there" because while I agree there are way too many people shooting sloppy and relying on photoshop to "fix" it, I can always tell when that's the case. Start with a turd, polish it as much as you want it's still a turd. So, you really are still left with a heavily manipulated bad photo. Start with a great photo, manipulate it to your hearts content, and it will probably be a great finished product.
I love photoshop, but it should be a tool not a crutch.
the question is a very good one and you can find pretty good points here too.
even in older days without digitalism it was possible to change, alter, improove, correct pictures taken (it was not that simple as with common programs). In art you are obviousely free to do anything you like, which is good... finding something to express yourself is hard enough and one should not draw bounderies.
If you are trying to get the best out of your shot/shots it still remains photography as it was taken by a camera... (you don't need labs to do that anymore)