Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Im coming at this from a novice perpective but these days but surely more skill is involved in the post-shot editing with Photoshop.
I've had very average shots turned into fab shots just through using Photoshop software.
It's the current dilema, is it the camera shot or is it the artistic use of the software?
Seeing as almost all camera features be done through clicking the mouse, is having an expensive camera a 'must-have' these days?
Photoshop can be fun especially if you are creative but does it detract from the art of Photography?
Tc
Common topic this...
At the end of the day I think it depends on what you want do do. If, you are happy do use PS every hour of everyday to 'make' good shots then that is fine, But you lose a lot by doing that. The fun is being out with a camera, and being able to produce good results from it.
I try to do the basics in PS but nothing more-i.e sharpening, levels, saturation etc.
It just depends on what you want to do-if you don't like digital manipulation then don't try it or look at it in the gallery.
I myself think that it would be possible to call PS work an art sometimes as some of it is really clever.
Hope this helps
Andrew
Quote: I've had very average shots turned into fab shots just through using Photoshop software.
Post these fab shots onto ePz and we can tell you if you need to concentrate on your photography, your Photoshop skills, or both.
It's also worth remembering that if you put rubbish into Photoshop you'll get rubbish out.
One cannot turn an out of focus, badly exposed and poor composition photo into a good photo using Photoshop or any other photographic software. One should pay attention to detail as much as possible in the capturing of the image rather than rely on software manipulation. Of course most of us use PS or PSE but only to tweak an image.
It would be good to see an example of your before and post production shots to guage your understanding of a "fab shot".
Paul
Ouch!! Now I've asked for it.
Errm, let me explain, I love to be a purist and use my camera for everything but I can't deny the strength and power of something like Photoshop. I'm in both camps (I think).
I will post some pics soon but here is one which I thought was an average pic until I changed it slightly.
I'd appreciate your comments...
http://static.flickr.com/31/40775414_91452253c6.jpg
Thanks.
Tc
I sometimes think the same way about lenses - expensive lenses, apparently, are sharper and have better contrast, but these things can be improved with software so what difference does it make? I know **** all about digital photography though so there's probably a good reason.
your initial thought was correct - it is an average picture. Here's the link. However, I agree that it has benefited from being converted to black and white but I'm afraid that the selective colouring of the sea was a mistake IMO. I'll try not to mention the horizon being slap bang in the middle of the picture...oops. ;o)
So there you go, to be a good photographer you need to take good photographs; having good Photoshop skills definitely helps too but consider that more of the icing on a very well made cake.
Learn from the computer scientists' axiom - Garbage in, Garbage out! Or as my mum is known for saying, "You can't make a silk purse out a sow's ear!"
I think a person skilled in PS can turn a good photo into a great one, but as for turning bad to good I'm not so sure.
there are exceptions to the rule but with a cheap digital camera you're generally going to get a worse image than with an expensive one.
for example you may get a cheap one with 6m pixels and compare it to a canon 10D with the same resoloution, but if the lens on the 10D is something like a 17-40 (L) or a 70-200 (L) then there will be so much more clarity and sharpness in the image than on the other camera ... but then even the 10D with a bad lens and a novice user can turn out awfull pics too.
The old addage sticks - you get what you pay for.
The photograph:
I don't quite like the position of the figure, which has interference with the buildings, and I don't like the ink blue of the sea - thought it was my eyesight for a moment.
But overall I like the style and composition. It has got something, but I wouldn't call it 'fab', although I might call it nearly. And I have plenty of experiments I'd put in that category, some have appeared here to get a second/third opinion.
Expensive kit:
You don't need expensive gear to take good photos.
There are lots of superb and inexpensive lenses, and good cameras to fit them to at modest prices. Vintage and even antique equipment can be, depending on your subject matter, as good as or better than more expensive new kit.
However if you want the photo on a computer you really need either a good digital camera, or digital back, or a good scanner, and they aren't cheap, yet.
Photoshop: Isn't cheap either (not the full verson anyhow)
Sure, if exposure is a bit off, or composition is improved by cropping, you can improve an image a lot, even rescue a disaster maybe, just as people do in the darkroom, but the raw material has to be there in the file to start with.
I do usually expect to work with an image on the computer now, but there are limits on how far you can go.
Lenses: There are many qualities in a lens beside sharpness, and I'm not really sure they can be faked up in PS. Although I'm impressed by what can be done with software.
Quote >>>"It's also worth remembering that if you put rubbish into Photoshop you'll get rubbish out."
It is worth stating that the above statement is pure biased bunkum. 
It always has been and probably always will be that the more sophisticated camera permits you to work under more conditions although the intermediate cameras are very good if used within their minor limitations and coupled with a competant ability with an editing programme. The average person has to have pretty specialised needs to justify an expensive camera. But of course it depends on what you call an expensive camera. Digital has upset my values with it's pay up front for subsequent savings.
In the end it is the measurbators who bother about lens and cameras and the creative person turns out great pictures, with or without the help of an editing programme.
That is the essence of true photography.
Quote >>>"It's also worth remembering that if you put rubbish into Photoshop you'll get rubbish out."
Perhaps also that is a good reason not to use Photoshop but rather Paint Shop Pro
I've been asking myself the same question ever since buying my first digital camera a couple of months ago - did I get into photography in order to spend endless hours with my head stuck in the PC? And why do commercial magazines promote the use of Photoshop so heavily with barely a token nod towards Paintshop Pro? (I realise I'm shooting myself in the foot here, since my only online pic so far is a composite, but after many years of using 35mm SLR the purist in me still believes in taking the best shot I can at the time!)
One thing however - when I began scanning photos for posting on my website, I noticed they looked rather different online than in print (a bit "dulled-down"..), and PSP DOES improve the look of them for showing over the net!
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Login or Join Now
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
foliopic 'Movement' Competition
1st May 2012 - 31st May 2012
This month's competition theme is 'Movement' which can be interpreted in a number of ways. You could photograph an animal running, a person walking or a car speeding...Featured e2 Photo
Featured Directory Listing
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
Interact
Photography Gallery Photography Forums Recent Forum Activity Members' Meetings Members' BlogsSearch ePHOTOzine
Having trouble or would like to make a suggestion? Create a report
Calibrate your monitor so you can see 16 different shades.
ePHOTOzine © 2001 - 2012 Magezine Publishing | Contact Us | Site Map | Top