Photoshop, Good Or Evil?

[drew03cmc]

Post processing is different than combining two images via Photoshop. I agree with you Matt.

[Al Agnew]

I thought it might be fun to show one of my BPS covers and the bass photo I "modified" to produce it. Here is the photo, which was the biggest bass I could catch out of my pond on the day that I needed a bass pose for the cover:

Here is the finished cover illustration. Note I deepened the color, strengthened the pattern, curved the tail more, made the fins smaller, made the head smaller and changed its proportions a bit, put stronger light on the fish, made the fish fatter, and added more sheen on the fish. The background was also from a photo on this one, the foreground water was made up, the water splash was made up as well.

[exiledguide]

When I grow up, I will be forever deeply scarred emotionaly having found out that BPS covers or Outdoor Life photos might be photoshoped. What can you believe any more? This might just drive me to drown my sorrows in alcohol This is as bad as finding out your girlfriend wears falsies. Shame shame

[Mitch f]

When I grow up, I will be forever deeply scarred emotionaly having found out that BPS covers or Outdoor Life photos might be photoshoped. What can you believe any more? This might just drive me to drown my sorrows in alcohol This is as bad as finding out your girlfriend wears falsies. Shame shame

If it makes you feel any better most of the chicks in the magazines are "enhanced" as well

[Chief Grey Bear]

For me, photography is about creating an image that is pleasing to me and hopefully others. I view photography as a form of art, and not a journalistic reporting tool. So there is no question whether I will post process an image or not. If an image makes it through to edits, then it will get post-processed. My post-processing generally includes edits to exposure, saturation levels, contrast levels, sharpening (basic edits). My opinion is that any photographer that earns a living with a lens, will post-process. But for me, and probably Cheif Grey Bear and Al Agnew and ness, post-processing is different than "photoshopping". The question then becomes, where does the line get drawn? I am not sure, but it is an interesting question. I guess it begins with what your view of photography is. --Matt Tucker

Can't argue a lick with that Matt. I think you are right on.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I don't really consider moving sliders and clicking a mouse as "art."

I thought it might be fun to show one of my BPS covers and the bass photo I "modified" to produce it. Here is the photo, which was the biggest bass I could catch out of my pond on the day that I needed a bass pose for the cover:

Looks great to me Al.

[MattTucker]

Post processing is different than combining two images via Photoshop.

That is where the line is hard to draw for me. Personally, I am really becoming a fanatic about HDR processing. In the HDR process, you are combining several images taken at different exposures to create a single image. Bringing out the various details and tones of a scene. I am using multiple images to create a single image, but in the end I don't consider that photoshopping an image because nothing about the scene substantially changed and I am using technology to enhance the detail.

So I guess for me, I would tend to draw the line at placing subjects in different backgrounds or changing the sizing of features/subjects in the image. But it is a slippery slope between what is a photograph in its truest sense and what is art in this digital age. For me, the answer will continually change.

--Matt Tucker

[Phil Lilley]

FYI- Ron asked me to delete all his posts and membership on the forum. It is done.

[ness]

For me, photography is about creating an image that is pleasing to me and hopefully others. I view photography as a form of art, and not a journalistic reporting tool. So there is no question whether I will post process an image or not. If an image makes it through to edits, then it will get post-processed. My post-processing generally includes edits to exposure, saturation levels, contrast levels, sharpening (basic edits). My opinion is that any photographer that earns a living with a lens, will post-process. But for me, and probably Cheif Grey Bear and Al Agnew and ness, post-processing is different than "photoshopping". The question then becomes, where does the line get drawn? I am not sure, but it is an interesting question. I guess it begins with what your view of photography is.

--Matt Tucker

I'd just add (and, I know you know this Matt), that it is art to be able to see a scene, be there at the right time, compose it correctly, expose it correctly, know what filter will enhance the scene, etc. I really try to get it right at the time of the shot. Most of my pp is cropping and the occasional exposure, contrast or saturation adjustment. The more you get away from the original, the more artifacts you end up with. I haven't used Photoshop in a few years -- most everything I want to accomplish is handled by a good capture, in RAW, with minor PP in Lightroom.

You won't be surpised that I'm not a real fan of HDR, will you?

MItch: I'd venture a guess that close to 100% of chicks in magazines are enhanced. Nobody wants to see yellow teeth, a zit, wrinkles, or hair on a girl's face.

[Al Agnew]

When I grow up, I will be forever deeply scarred emotionaly having found out that BPS covers or Outdoor Life photos might be photoshoped. What can you believe any more? This might just drive me to drown my sorrows in alcohol This is as bad as finding out your girlfriend wears falsies. Shame shame

Just so you're not too deeply scarred, here are two more images. One was painted in the traditional way, acrylic on canvas. The other was created entirely in Photoshop but without using photos in any way...it was drawn and painted in Photoshop.Can you tell which one was which?