| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/11/2007 09:57:03 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by TCGuru:
To say that photoshop is the debil, and that everyone that uses it is not practicing the fine art of photography... |
Muahahaha! I am the DEBIL!!!! |
You're the [Spanish word for] weak???
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 10:21:23 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by Ktizzle8807:
I don't care how much I get bashed on here, but photoshop is not real photography. |
1)Not gonna bash you, and I agree photoshop is not photography. It is however a photographic tool that is used for everything from fantasy art to pure photojournalism. It can be overused, and it definitely can be under used.
Originally posted by Ktizzle8807:
You can be horrible at taking pictures, yet you edit them so much that they don't even look like a real picture. |
And you end up with something horrible that doesn't look like a photo. Truth is that even the best Photoshop gurus are challenged trying to turn a turd into a supermodel.
Originally posted by Ktizzle8807:
Doesn't make any sense to me. |
Because, as you admit, you don't use it. If you did, you'd have no issues understanding why we PS.
Originally posted by Ktizzle8807:
I personally don't edit any of my pictures with photoshop or any program of that kind. |
I do... on almost every PHOTO I produce, (although Lightroom is becoming more and more my workhorse). I don't call myself a Photoshop artist, or even a graphics artist. I'm a photographer. Ofcourse, I've paid my dues in a traditional darkroom and can assure you that a lot of what you think PS is used for has been done long before computers existed.
But, let's look at film... you take some pics, you drop them off at Walmart to get printed. First things first, a computer scans the film to determine how to best develop it. Then after it is developed, a computer scans each negative and automatically tweaks color, saturation, brightness, contrast, sharpness, etc...and then prints it. Your photo was edited by a computer.
Let's say you have a darkroom. You start by choosing the chemicals you want to use, what temperature to develop at and how long. Each determines how you edit the film (which you have chosen for certain characteristics in itself). You then choose your paper and start again with the choice of chemicals, temps, etc... also exposure times on the enlarger, etc, etc. Then there are a lot of complicated techniques I don't even want to try to explain.
So, now you use a digital camera? Do you use the saturation, contrast or sharpness settings or do you let a computer do that all for you?
Let's just put it this way: I'm all for letting everyone making his/her own artistic decisions, but in the end, it's not MY foot you are shooting by refusing to acknowledge Photoshop as what it is ( a tool).
|
|
|
|
11/11/2007 11:14:25 PM · #103 |
| Heh, shouldn't this have been in the "Rant" section, was sure phrased with more emotion than logic :) |
|
|
|
11/11/2007 11:19:27 PM · #104 |
I dunno, something has to process the shot- this is digital photography after all. Some form of software has to turn that digital information into an image that can be reproduced on a monitor.
I like to think that using photoshop is even more purism than shooting jpeg and leaving it that. Letting the camera do all the processing seems too automatic to me- and what's the fun of using "auto" settings all the time anyway? |
|
|
|
12/29/2007 10:37:21 AM · #105 |
photography is not art/
with photshop, I can make it more like art.
very ironic. |
|
|
|
12/29/2007 10:43:38 AM · #106 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
photography is not art/
with photshop, I can make it more like art.
very ironic. |
Art Roflmao??
|
|
|
|
12/29/2007 11:13:00 AM · #107 |
Originally posted by Ktizzle8807:
I don't care how much I get bashed on here, but photoshop is not real photography.
You can be horrible at taking pictures, yet you edit them so much that they don't even look like a real picture.
Doesn't make any sense to me.
I personally don't edit any of my pictures with photoshop or any program of that kind. |
Who gives a monkey, whether its photography or not? It's great that you've got an opinion, but I think you need to come to terms with the fact, that photoshop is here to stay! I'll admit it and say I'm absolutelly shite at photography - who cares, I don't! photoshop allows me to be creative, which is what matters to me. I dont consider myself a photographer, if anything, I'm a photo artist and a poor one at that, but does it matter that you have to fit into a certain group or tick a certain box - no! Just go out there and enjoy doing what you do, and sod the rest of them! |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 11:56:24 AM · #108 |
| In fact, no photography purist is really going to be using a digital camera, since you are, and typing on threads on the internet, jump right in and go hognuts with photoshop. It can only make your stuff better. |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 12:00:55 PM · #109 |
I'm not going to read the whole thread, because I agree with the OP. Photoshop is cheating.
You know what else is cheating? Velvia! What a joke! It messes with all the colours and makes everything look fake!
Don't get me started on darkrooms... why on earth would you want to take your negatives and ...change them? Dodging, burning, contrast boosting... all lies! |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 12:18:23 PM · #110 |
| LOL OMG that is such an awesome attitude. "I know there are well over 100 posts here and some of them are probably well worded and make sense and could bring new theories or thoughts on PS, BUT I WON"T READ THEM BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY MADE UP MY MIND AND WANT ALL OF YOU TO READ MY POST INSTEAD." LOL OMG priceless. As someone who has read this thread I would love for us to lock it so that it can be viewed but not posted to again. :-) Because seriously, you can't even make the horse out anymore. I am not even sure the skeleton of the horse is fully left. |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 12:24:48 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by Mike_Adams:
I WON"T READ THEM BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY MADE UP MY MIND AND WANT ALL OF YOU TO READ MY POST INSTEAD. |
Sums up my sentiment perfectly! Who cares what anyone else thinks? I'm the only one whose opinion actually matters around here... |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 12:32:41 PM · #112 |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 12:35:01 PM · #113 |
I agree with Mike, this thread should be LOCKED at this point!!!
|
|
|
|
01/10/2008 12:38:21 PM · #114 |
Originally posted by yospiff:
 |
Apply that stick to  blindjustice for bumping this thread while you're at it. :) Oops. Guess I just bumped it too, but only by a few minutes, not 2 weeks. :P |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 01:08:52 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by bennettjamie:
I agree with Mike, this thread should be LOCKED at this point!!! |
Nah... just pass around the horse meat jerky.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2008 02:20:00 PM · #116 |
OK, wait long enough and another horse will be along in a moment ;-)
How about ...... Shooting in JPG is a waste of time, RAW is the only way to do it properly!
and even better now the new rules are here .... shooting in RAW ten times is the ONLY way to do it properly ;-) |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 02:51:18 PM · #117 |
Or, there is the ever popular "PC vs Mac" horse.
Or we could do "Digital vs film", but that may be just another view of the same horse as what started this topic.
Lots of horses to beat, I suppose. |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 02:56:40 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by Mike_Adams:
LOL OMG that is such an awesome attitude. "I know there are well over 100 posts here and some of them are probably well worded and make sense and could bring new theories or thoughts on PS, BUT I WON"T READ THEM BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY MADE UP MY MIND AND WANT ALL OF YOU TO READ MY POST INSTEAD." LOL OMG priceless. As someone who has read this thread I would love for us to lock it so that it can be viewed but not posted to again. :-) Because seriously, you can't even make the horse out anymore. I am not even sure the skeleton of the horse is fully left. |
I think you might wanna turn your sarcasm meter on Mike. ;) |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 02:57:07 PM · #119 |
Geez louise guys, get over it. It's the 21st century. Yes, photoshop makes digital photographs look better. It's still photography because it's not-not photography, and if you don't like it you can go back to getting cancer from film developers.
There, I said what everyone was thinking. |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 03:00:09 PM · #120 |
And you know what else, I think using any sort of camera is cheating. It's not the same scene you saw, it never will be. It's a two-dimensional lie made out of paper. So photographers are liars, who care's. We're still better than politicians and.
Message edited by author 2008-01-10 15:00:27. |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 03:06:48 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by LanndonKane:
And you know what else, I think using any sort of camera is cheating. It's not the same scene you saw, it never will be. It's a two-dimensional lie made out of paper. So photographers are liars, who care's. We're still better than politicians and. |
Still better than politicans and periods? |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 03:11:41 PM · #122 |
Originally posted by Phil:
I think you might wanna turn your sarcasm meter on Mike. ;) |
Why? I was being dead serious, you know... |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 03:16:47 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by Magno:
Who gives a monkey, whether its photography or not? |
I'm going to jump in here on behalf of primates. "Who gives a monkey?" - you consider monkeys the equivalent of sh*t? or a Rat's ass? Someday apes will take over this planet and will enslave us and they will remember your name, Magno.
The only other contribution I have is this...
edit to add a new siggy:
-Art
-Better than Politicians and Periods.
edit once again to add this, which seemed apt:
Message edited by author 2008-01-10 15:20:29. |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 03:26:54 PM · #124 |
| funny this should come up, I was talking to someone yesterday and showing them DPC and they said that most of the pictures weren't real photography because they were "staged". I laughed my butt off at them. |
|
|
|
01/10/2008 03:29:04 PM · #125 |
Originally posted by sabphoto:
funny this should come up, I was talking to someone yesterday and showing them DPC and they said that most of the pictures weren't real photography because they were "staged". I laughed my butt off at them. |
You should have told them you "don't give a monkey". ;-) |
|
