Photoshopping comp/assignment entries

[boskysquelch]

Photoshop takes years to learn too, and I think that is what scares many people!

I also had a bigger piece which was summed up by that...but couldn't be arsed to post it in the long_long of things..bit like the English Elizabethans first cooked the plant and discarded the tubers when potatoes were discovered....blah blah blah blah Potatoe_plop eh?

If you think what you are being given out of your digicam is wot you should have proper then you are just like people who insist on cooking their pizzas with the wrapping and box still intact ::::THIS IS WHY THEY GIVE YOU FOOOO's INSTRUCTIONS TO UNWRAP AND DEBOX DEM!!!!!... ,,,and this is why Digicam manufacturerererers give you pooopy progs that you load onto you putas and then ignore because you can't be bothered to learn'em....and flimsy instruction you can't be bothered to read?

BAAAH!

Zup to you whadddeva you do but please can the bleeeeeeating stop adnorseam...if you think what you get out of a digicam is the Holy Spirit of Photography and Film is the Gospel or that Bromide Prints are the Psalms...yeah_foookin_yeah!!! but none is pure nowt is pure...pure is for Lickle Baby Jeeeezus!

Right I'm off to snap some fiddlers down Gunnard's head waaaahay!!...see my pickess in the Comp soon!!!LOL twill have tobe a moby job tho'...better pickees next week!

 

[wordie]

Oh, and have another drink while your there.....!

 

[boskysquelch]

Oh, and have another drink while your there.....!

I haven't drunk since I was 18...ffs!!!! ,,,and now me medication would kill me if i did!

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

I haven't drunk since I was 18...ffs!!!! ,,,and now me medication would kill me if i did!

cunt.

 

[pengaleng]

cunt.

quite.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

I've got an idea. All of us must use the same cameras, and we must all have the same in-camera sharpening level, but no in-camera saturation level. Everyone who uses film must use the same film and that film must record EXACTLY the colours that were present in the scene. Therefore no Velvia or anything like that.

A question to all the antiphotoshop photopurist people: Do you think that you're not manipulating your images?

Because the truth is that if you shoot digital without using photoshop, you are still manipulating your images, even if you are not controlling the manipulation yourself, the camera is doing it for you unless you turn off all in-camera sharpening and saturation settings. If you did turn off all the in-camera manipulation, would this make you a better photographer than someone who takes control of the image manipulation rather than sticking to what the camera decides? Should we ban in-camera manipulation? WHat about the people whose cameras don't allow them to turn it off? Ban them from entering?

If you shoot film, you're manipulating your images before you even take them simply by choosing the film. How is choosing Velvia instead of Astia for landscapes, any different from increasing the saturation and changing the colour balance of a RAW image from a digital camera? With film you're not controlling the level of manipulation yourself. The people who designed the film's spectral response decided it for you. And what about printing. The appearance of the image depends on the paper that you printed it on. Let's say you chose matt instead of gloss, would that be fair? Or how about scanners, they all have different colour profiles and gamuts, and scanner software no doubt does manipulation to the image. Should we ban people from choosing between films? Should we ban people from using different scanners? Should we ban people whose prints were colour corrected by the minilab technician (i.e. pretty much everyone's prints)?

Do you use flash? Should that be allowed? After all, you're just adding artificial light to a scene and that truly is manipulation. Should we ban flash too?

What about filters, they're manipulation. I don't see why it matters whether you apply a real filter before you take the picture or in PS after you take the picture. Should we ban them too?

one word ....

raw...

 

[snadge]

With regards to snadges' photo, I thought he just took that with a slow shutter speed TBH. It is common thing to do with waves and water, as you get a nice soft blurred effect, like he achieved.

yep, and he thought I did that with Photoshop.

check exif

 

[5T3R30TYP3]

one word ....

raw...

That would be completely unfair on digital users though. It's the equivalent to film users only being allowed to use one particular film. That's why I asked if we should ban film users from choosing different films.

 

[girasol]

Anyway, I find this recent re-emergence of the film vs. digital debate really, really tedious. If you want to go and climb a mountain with half a dozen glass plates, you go and do that.

If I painted or drew a picture, I'd keep making corrections until I was generally satisfied. I don't see why you wouldn't do the same with a photo, given the opportunity.

You can't make a shit photo good in Photoshop, and like I've said before, if you fuck up the exposure or composition then it'll show in your attempts to correct for it. If it was film, you could get more colour by shooting Velvia, or colour tints with lens filters. It's all the same in the end, it's just a bit easier.

It seems to me, and this is only conjecture, that most old school fanaticism stems from a jealousy that photography has become far more accessible with the digital age, and easier in terms of the time & effort you need to invest.

You speaketh sense! Not everyone has time/money to use a darkroom anyway. Digital photography has made it accessible to everyone.

An analogy can be used if we think about how computers allow anyone to make music at home... Is that a bad thing? (yes, ok, some of it is bad, but some of it is good)

Maybe there should be a competition for the 'proper' photographers, and another one for us mere mortals...

(although I agree that too much photoshopping can ruin a photo, it can also make it, it depends on the photoshopper! )