to Photoshop or not to photoshop, that is the question.

ianm · Jan 18, 2008

sorry, i have to disagree - where the digital format is concerned, that is not a photograph - i would do that type of treatment on an image for an ad or marketing campaign, you said it yourself - it's a manipulated image

Arch · Jan 18, 2008

ianm said:
you said it yourself - it's a manipulated image

so bearing in mind that photoshop is a digital darkroom.... about the 2 negatives that are merged to one image in the darkroom.... thats a manipulated image, so its not a photo?

Christie Photo · Jan 18, 2008

Archangel said:
(remember you can still blend 2 images to one in the darkroom...

I used to do this in the camera (multiple exposures). And all these years I thought I was making photographs. Hmmmm.....

-Pete

ianm · Jan 18, 2008

no - how can it be when you just described it as a manipulated image?

Arch · Jan 18, 2008

ianm said:
no - how can it be when you just described it as a manipulated image?

if you heal a dust spot or use curves you are manipulating the image... which means apart from the snapshot section this whole forum isnt really photogrpahy.

Christie Photo · Jan 18, 2008

ianm said:
no - how can it be when you just described it as a manipulated image?

I once made a photo of a home site. In the background was a telephone pole with a lamp. I has an airbrush artist do some work to hide/delete the pole. Did my image cease being a photograph when the artwork was applied?

Christie Photo · Jan 18, 2008

Archangel said:
if you heal a dust spot or use curves you are manipulating the image... which means apart from the snapshot section this whole forum isnt really photogrpahy.

Oh! Dust spotting! Something done at EVERY pro lab. Good point.

monkeykoder · Jan 18, 2008

The set of manipulated images and the set of photographs are not disjoint (they have common elements. Just because an image isn't good for documentation doesn't make it any less of a photograph.

ianm · Jan 18, 2008

well, we'll just have to agree to disagree

Christie Photo · Jan 18, 2008

I'll make one more point, then I think I'll have to leave this discussion.

When I would shoot a church interior during a wedding on type S film, would you say the image was NOT a photograph until the lab corrected the color balance making the scene more like it appeared to the naked eye?

-Pete

ianm · Jan 18, 2008

whatever you take via your slr or point and shoot is a photograph - computer manipulated (not edited) images are, just what they are computer manipulated images

Honeybee · Jan 18, 2008

Are people really getting upset over this 'question'? Why can't it just be that people have their own views on the subject. Some want to create a masterpiece in photoshop while some just want to keep their photos simple, yet beautiful. People believe what they want and have their own ideas on what makes a wonderful picture. Who really cares what the other thinks on pp? Some use it a little while others may use it alot to enhance certain things they 'saw'. Either way, it is still photography and art work. It's all in the eye of the beholder.

Can you people agree to disagree? Get your point out there and let it be. No need to continue arguing . People have their own mind and thoughts on the matter.

Christie Photo · Jan 18, 2008

Honeybee said:
Can you people agree to disagree?

Heh... funny you should ask.

I don't believe I can... at least not on this point. The "agree to disagree" is always the best exit strategy when one cannot substaniate what one is asserting.

A lot of people pass through here wanting to learn. It's very important to me that the information they get is correct.

I offered three situations (dust spotting, airbrush work, and color correction) of manipulating photographs that involve NO PhotoShop... NO computers. Just film, an enlarger and artwork. Not one of these was addressed.

Oh well.

-Pete

The_Traveler · Jan 18, 2008

I think that some people have not grasped the fact that there is no such thing as an un-manipulated picture.

Making believe that some set of manipulations (usually ones that are traditional and mostly invisible) are OK and others are outside the realm of 'photography' is not a question of 'views', it is just silly.

Christie Photo · Jan 18, 2008

The_Traveler said:
I think that some people have not grasped the fact that there is no such thing as an un-manipulated picture. ...not a question of 'views', it is just silly.

Well said.

-Pete