Photoshop??? Photographer or nerd???

[photohenrik]

Well some things are oki... But when a photographer not even can cut the lines of the picture with his camera and get the right light, then there is something wrong... They trust PS to do it for them... And that is a nerd

[jcboyd]

Some inexpensive cameras will give a reasonably good snapshot quality right out of the camera. No adjustments necessary, complete with the glaring flash. If this is what you are after, great. If you require more from your images then post processing to some extent is needed quite often. With my camera I have it set to NOT give the best contrast. My personal feelings are that I get more information recorded in the highlight/shadow areas with these settings. Because of this almost all of my images have been adjusted using at least levels. Sometimes a small amount of saturation, brightness/contrast are tweaked along with sharpening of some sort. For me this gives the results I am after. Some may not agree with the way I have interpreted my files but I am happy and in the end this is for me what counts.

When making adjustments to my files I would hope the viewers’ reaction is “WOW, that’s a nice imageâ€

[dovey]

For me, the end result is all that matters. If I like a picture either on pbase or as a consumer in a shop, the owner of the photo either gets my vote or my money. Photoshopped or not, the popularity of a piece is up to the viewers. And judging from the "popular galleries" list here, it seems most people like looking at photoshopped pics. I can't say I blame them... I do too. When it comes time to buy something like a calendar or a print to hang in my house, I go for what most appeals to me.... I don't care if the photographer used a 1, 2, or 3stop graduated split neutral density filter for a sunset, or a circular polarizing filter to reduce glare or make a sky more blue than reality, or made some modifications in the darkroom, or used photoshop, or left it completely natural. The finished product is what sells... not the process.

And I thought "nerd" went out with the 1980's?

[photographer_riverside]

The pc of today is the darkroom of yesteryear, we as photographers have to move on with the times, in fact I would dare to say that we have a great deal to play in pc darkroom techno! Afterall we spend so much time at them1 Anyway, I dont think we are nerds in anyway at all. Talking about nerds, i read a leaflet to day,in it a photographer compared him self to a doctor, by saying " you would not trust an unqualified doctor, why trust an unqualified photographer?" well, I dont know about all you people, but I would not consider myself on the same level of a doctor! i do concider myself to be professional, in fact! come to think of it! I too have never paid to have letters after my name too! so maybe i do have something in common with the doctor! LOl

[dcfaria]

Henrikfotograf wrote:

But when a photographer not even can cut the lines of the picture with his camera and get the right light, then there is something wrong...

I just can't see that! I mean taking pictures is not a competition on who can do what with a given canera with given functions!! Cameras creates images, period! Judge the final result, but how you get there is irrelevant for me.

Is somthing wrong when you change Depth of field by changing the aperture? Is it wrong when you try to freeze somthing with a short exposure time, or blur it with a long? No it's not and it sure doesn't recreate the way everyone views the world (we can't freeze fast movments and w can't blur slow once). It's an effect you use to make the picture look the way you want it to look! Nothing more. Why are these effects allowed and not others? I simply don't get it! Or is the game that they have to be physically accesible in the camera?

[ukexpat]

Hey Nigel,
I think its possible you missed what I was saying. I wasnt saying I was opposed to post-caputure editing, Im not. What I was trying to say is that one consequence of the PS boom is a whole crop of people using cameras who are less inclined to focus on composition and correct exposure at the time a photograph is taken. And while I do lament the number of shooters of this ilk, I do (and did note earlier) that a secondary consequence of the digital boom is more people out using cameras which is a good thing. At no point have I suggested that post capture processing is bad, just that alot of people regard it as a place to fix their images rather than focusing on quality inital images.

Rodney

OK, I think we are ad idem on this one....

[photohenrik]

Very good said... They just take a picture and don't care about it, because they can go home and make it good with PS... Why not make it good with the camera... Like I said before, anyone can take a picture... In my eyes a photographer is one who makes a good picture with his camera and a nerd makes it good only with PS...

Merry X-mas too all of you

Yours sincerly

Henrik
from denmark