# Thoughts on Photoshop?



## KamesG (Jan 12, 2011)

I know a lot of people have something against photoshop when it used to extreme measures. Beyond your basic touch-up. Leaning more on the photo manipulation side.

As a photographer I see nothing wrong with it. I love to edit the color, tones, and just about anything else to extreme measures.

Thoughts and opinions?


----------



## KamesG (Jan 12, 2011)

Perhaps this is a better example of what I mean,


----------



## Derrel (Jan 12, 2011)

Photo illustration, like your last sample, is perfectly fine. Photo illustration is a time-honored craft. It differs from "photography" in some major ways. The world is big. There is plenty of room for both photographers, as well as for pixel-pushers, and for everybody in between.


----------



## MichiganFarts (Jan 12, 2011)

I got no probs with it.  Me likes!

I really don't have the talent for some of that stuff, so I personally just stick to minor editing.


----------



## Blitz55 (Jan 12, 2011)

I use photoshop to Illustrate and paint my drawings. 

So most likely I will use it to edit my photos around. But as a novice Id like to get better at taking a good photo with no editing really or slightly some instead of leaning on my PS knowledge and just manipulating a photo. If that makes sense.


----------



## SlickSalmon (Jan 12, 2011)

Considering how he slaved over his images, I often wonder what Ansel Adams would have done with Photoshop.


----------



## Garbz (Jan 12, 2011)

Your top three examples have nothing to do with photoshop. These arguments have existed long before photoshop. But what is critically important is not what other people think, it's what YOU think. It's your hobby and no one should be telling you how to do it.






This is an image published in a book in 1981. I don't know the history of the image itself. But the book predates Photoshop 1.0 by 6 years.


----------



## skieur (Jan 12, 2011)

The true colour is pink and blue with a totally different look.

skieur


----------



## Trever1t (Jan 12, 2011)

the less one is familiar with it the less it will be familiar


----------



## Novux (Jan 12, 2011)

Generally, the more artistically/illustratively it departs from the original image, the more I enjoy it. Isn't that what PS is for? 

Not a fan of airbrushing or similar "beauty products" though. To each his own.


----------



## KamesG (Jan 13, 2011)

Garbz said:


> Your top three examples have nothing to do with photoshop. These arguments have existed long before photoshop. But what is critically important is not what other people think, it's what YOU think. It's your hobby and no one should be telling you how to do it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Garbz (Jan 14, 2011)

Not Photoshop specifically. My point was that there is nothing new in Photoshop. A lot of people think that digital perverted the art because of photoshop, but in reality people have been doing edits in the darkroom long before hand.

I pre-empted the telling people what to think bit. Many of these threads turn into a post processing vs natural style pissing contest. If it does, ignore them. It's your opinion that counts


----------



## PASM (Jan 14, 2011)

That's great!


Garbz said:


> This is an image published in a book in 1981. I don't know the history of the image itself. But the book predates Photoshop 1.0 by 6 years.


----------



## KenC (Jan 14, 2011)

Check this out:

Amazon.com: Photo Fakery: The History and Techniques of Photographic Deception and Manipulation (9781574881660): Dino A. Brugioni: Books


----------



## Sportsphotoguy (Jan 14, 2011)

I'm with you, Photoshop is great.  If you ask me, Photoshop was created for "extreme measures".  Why else would one pay so much for it?  You don't pay $600 for a "basic touch-up" program.  That's what Photoshop Elements is for.  Photoshop is for those of us who can create art and make money from our art.  I use it to make sports posters for little league parents.  I think that those who don't like PS for extreme measures just don't know how to use it.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 15, 2011)

Photoshop is awesome! been using it for 10 years now. I love it =)
cool photos!


----------



## Fujito (Jan 17, 2011)

Garbz said:


> Your top three examples have nothing to do with photoshop. These arguments have existed long before photoshop. But what is critically important is not what other people think, it's what YOU think. It's your hobby and no one should be telling you how to do it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Exactly. I got very into a discussion like this on another forum where a purist was basically bashing everyone who edits.

The fact is photographers have been editing and manipulating their pictures forever. I did film photography before digital and in the darkroom you can burn, dodge, use toner, and do interesting things with the negatives to get a picture like quoted above. There are obviously a lot of pretentious snobs out there, so just do what pleases you (and your clients if you have any).


----------



## LDPhoto (Jan 17, 2011)

I don't like photoshop. I think it takes away from the integrity of the original image! Besides basic editing I don't like using it for anything!


----------



## KmH (Jan 17, 2011)

LDPhoto said:


> I don't like photoshop. I think it takes away from the integrity of the original image! Besides basic editing I don't like using it for anything!


Forget about having a successsful photography business then. 

The original image has no 'integrity'. It recorded a 3D scene in 2D, and didn't record the entire dynamic range.

Retail photography customers expect the photographer to make them look good, by Photoshoping out the gory details.


----------



## spacefuzz (Jan 18, 2011)

I love photoshop, it lets me make my pictures look like how I saw the world....or how I want to see it.  Without editing things just look flat.


----------



## PASM (Jan 18, 2011)

A lot of people have something against Modern Art (circa 1870-1980). I ignore them! 



KamesG said:


> I know a lot of people have something against photoshop
> Thoughts and opinions?


----------



## KmH (Jan 18, 2011)

What has art been called since 1980?


----------



## Shiva_42 (Jan 18, 2011)

I'm only put off when people start to treat _either_ side of the argument as a religion, instead of as a hobby or a vocation.

I'm not GOOD enough to profoundly manipulate my pics, so I tend to do fairly simple edits and repairs with PS, but as my understanding and abilities grow, I _promise_ I'll try more and greater things with it.

If you are a trying to strictly document a scene or an event, I can understand an argument for the most "unaltered" image possible.  As for me, as much as I am able to claim, mine is "Art", and I treat it as such.  Meaning, I'll do anything and everything to it to achieve the image I'm searching for, be it kosher or not!


----------



## jizwood125 (Jan 18, 2011)

that is so great!


----------



## PASM (Jan 18, 2011)

Postmodern. 



KmH said:


> What has art been called since 1980?


----------

