Get 20% Off PortraitPro 22 With Our Exclusive Code

help needed to improve photos.


studioline 11 72 4 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2011 11:15AM
Yes it is. We had to work close to the edge of the pillars and it was job heaving myself up to the pillars themselves. Also the studio light was between us and it was windy too so had to keep an eye on the wind too. It is a great place to shoot and I will be revisiting it again.
As you probably noticed more images of this will be going up soon.

PS. A tourist came up to me and asked at what time I was going to dance. Now that was funny!
Graflex 18 488 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2011 2:54PM
To become a great photographer-leave photoshop in the box!

A great photograph doesn't need the help of magic tricks just a bloody good eye from the person behind the camera.

Photoshop covers up a multitude of sins which should have been corrrect before it got to the final stage,this goes for portraits or landscapes...

A great photograph doesn't need afterwork-like bringing in someone to plaster over the cracks.

My comments: get it right or your fired!.

It's why very few people get ahead in this line of work and remain always on the fringe.
studioline 11 72 4 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2011 3:05PM
Not convinced that that is the whole story Graflex. If a person is a master of photoshop as well as a master photographer then he or she will no doubt be better than a person only possessing one of those great skills. I think you are correct in saying get it right first time but as the shoots get more complex then it becomes much more plausable to get some assistance in getting all the elements to sit together well.
oldblokeh 10 1.2k United Kingdom
17 Oct 2011 5:05PM

Quote:
Photoshop covers up a multitude of sins which should have been corrrect before it got to the final stage,this goes for portraits or landscapes...

A great photograph doesn't need afterwork-like bringing in someone to plaster over the cracks.

My comments: get it right or your fired!.

It's why very few people get ahead in this line of work and remain always on the fringe.



What? You mean like Ansel Adams? I'm sure he'd have used Photoshop if he'd had it. To quote him:

Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships.
studioline 11 72 4 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2011 5:14PM
Great name Oldblokeh. I think I can see Grafiex point to some degree. If you do get it right first time great as adding photoshop work later adds in artefacts.
I have taken on board that recently and I have reduced my photoshopping to quite a lrge degree but in fairness i was using it a huuuuggeeee lot before.
Jestertheclown 13 8.5k 253 England
17 Oct 2011 6:02PM
If you're shooting in RAW, is it possible to get a finished shot straight from the camera with no modifications whatsoever?
User_Removed 11 4.6k 1 Scotland
17 Oct 2011 6:48PM

Quote:If you're shooting in RAW, is it possible to get a finished shot straight from the camera with no modifications whatsoever?

Quote:If you're shooting in RAW, is it possible to get a finished shot straight from the camera with no modifications whatsoever?


No. By definition, Raw images require "finishing".
Jestertheclown 13 8.5k 253 England
17 Oct 2011 8:26PM
Thanks LF. That's what I thought.

So much for leaving Photoshop in the box then.
User_Removed 11 4.6k 1 Scotland
17 Oct 2011 10:31PM

Quote:Thanks LF. That's what I thought.

So much for leaving Photoshop in the box then.



Quite. (Well, maybe not Photoshop, but you would need at least a simple Raw processor).
Graflex 18 488 United Kingdom
18 Oct 2011 8:45AM
If I was really judging someones work for employment I would present him/her with a task and then have them give me the 'memory card'..proof of the pudding as it were.

Sort the sheep from the goats.

Yes,of course chiseling away at negatives has been going on since time began-but todays pictures are so obviously been 'touched up'people seem no longer/or scenes,are recognizable-it's a joke.They are walking zombies or fake landscapes that don't exist.This isn't photography.

Listen if you guys want to play with your toys go ahead,would I hire you...NO.

NEXT!
Jasper87 Plus
11 2.8k 158 England
18 Oct 2011 12:00PM
Why not go the whole hog and ban filters as well. Do they not alter reality to some degree as well? Or restrict photography to a 50mm lens (or equiv depending on censor) to give a 'normal' view. Photoshop et al gives the majority the tools to do what used to be the preserve of a minority.

PHOTOGRAPHY is 'drawing with light'. It is the whole process from finding a subject to presenting the final image. We all have self-imposed restrictions on what we will or won't do to achieve this final image, but they are 'self-imposed' and should not be foisted on others. I have used PSE occasionally to put a bit more 'pop' into an image (not very often as I'm not that au fait with it) and would be more than upset if I was regarded as a 'joke' or 'zombie'.

I respect Graflex's methods of workforce recruitment - but would I work for him anyway......
Pete 20 18.8k 97 England
18 Oct 2011 12:16PM
You may find this article I wrote a few years ago interesting Photography is an Art form
Tooth 16 5.8k 227 Ireland
18 Oct 2011 12:22PM

Quote:Yes,of course chiseling away at negatives has been going on since time began-but todays pictures are so obviously been 'touched up'people seem no longer/or scenes,are recognizable-it's a joke.They are walking zombies or fake landscapes that don't exist.This isn't photography.

Listen if you guys want to play with your toys go ahead,would I hire you...NO.

NEXT!



is most of your shooting in black and white?

Your thinking certainly seems to be Smile
Jasper87 Plus
11 2.8k 158 England
18 Oct 2011 12:34PM
Pete, Interesting - and fairly well sums up where this thread went. Like your last comment about crap being passed off as art. Crap is crap until someone says 'that's really good' and pays a fortune for it. The 'artist' achieves superstar status, but at the end of the day that artwork is still crap to lots of people. Very subjective - to each his own - which is what I was getting at above.
User_Removed 11 4.6k 1 Scotland
18 Oct 2011 2:14PM

Quote:Why not go the whole hog and ban filters as well. Do they not alter reality to some degree as well? Or restrict photography to a 50mm lens (or equiv depending on censor to give a 'normal' view.


Love it!!!

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.