Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Exclusive 25% off Affinity Photo: Professional photo editing with no subscription!

Photography vs PhotoEditing

b_chat 5 3 India
6 Sep 2012 3:05PM
it depends on the photographer...whether he wants just to correct some errors or to give the photo an artistic look using those softwares...
photography is an art...highly edited photographs have their own look, style etc...but yes, they are photographs anyway...in many cases, editing is required to suit the theme of that particular pic(like B n w, sepia etc.)...moreover, its nt possible to keep in mind all the rules or regulations, terms etc.(of photography)when the shutter is pressed, again its editing to save Tongue
Lastly...If any Highly Edited photo is unliked by anyone, thats his/her prblm...nt the photographer's prblm...He has the right to do so.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

SURYARGHYA 5 4 2 India
6 Sep 2012 4:04PM
I think the title should goes like that ' Photography and Photoediting'. Subject,Smile composition , quantity an quality are heart of photography and photoediting is like medicine to it. It make one to improve the photo and resolve the mistakes. Both photography and photoediting are a great art. Not all can do this perfectly. In old days great photographers got 1 best snap among 100. But now technologies made it to get 90 best snap among 100 or make it better after one capture it. Smile Just make a right application of what you have and what they lack.
Dibyajit 5 9 India
7 Sep 2012 2:24PM

Quote: the camera does not see what the human eye sees

I completely agree with you with this point. I guess the human eye is the best camera ever made.Smile
And the problem for any photographer is it is next to impossible to capture a shot in any camera which is equal to what is captured by the human eye
Dibyajit 5 9 India
7 Sep 2012 2:54PM

Quote:Unfortunately Nature does mean things like give you scene with a greater dynamic range than the camera can capture

I guess Nature's got almost limitless power to beautify anything or any place and for photographers its almost an impossible task to capture it totally perfect.
And as far as Ansel Adams's sayings, I really didn't what he meant by "mistakes that nature made"
How the hell can nature made mistake!!!!!!! And even if nature makes a mistake how on the earth can he even think of correcting it!!!!!!!! Great photographers have been able to take great snaps only and only because Nature has provided them with some great scenes or some great landscape to capture in their cameras. Yes at times there are many snaps where due to any photographer's extreme talent an ordinary place or ordinary things may look highly special in a snap. But still, how can a photographer (how extremely talented he/she may be) think himself/herself to be more perfect than Nature!!!!
Dibyajit 5 9 India
7 Sep 2012 3:04PM

Quote:As a photographer I believe the most important part of the process is the finished image whether a file or a print and everything leading up to that goal is a means to an end and a matter of personal preference.

Unfortunately in these days I see photographers give a much more time and effort and their thinking power to edit a snap, compare to taking the actual snap by adjusting the aperture, shutter speed or iso and the most importantly deciding the composition of the snap or even it's angle..
mikehit 8 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
7 Sep 2012 3:26PM

Quote:And as far as Ansel Adams's sayings, I really didn't what he meant by "mistakes that nature made"

Chill out, Dibyajit. He was being somewhat tongue-in cheek and was talking from a photographic point of view.
You cannot take a picture of any sort without making a decison that affects the output. The minute you choose Kodak film over Fuji film you are making a decision that affects the colour balance in the picture to one that suits you.
The moment you choose 'Cloudy' white balance over 'Sunny' white balance you are affecting the picture. The choice of paper that you use for printing will saturate or desaturate certain tones. In fact, merely taking a picture is cropping the scene and how you crop can affect the emotion.

I suggest that if you feel so strongly about picture versus nature then photography is not for you.
peterjones Plus
16 4.7k 1 United Kingdom
7 Sep 2012 3:44PM
Each to their own Dibyajit; you raised a point, I gave you my personal view; your path towards your image may well be different to mine and everybody else's but in this digital age I suggest you don't try to generalise.
Dibyajit 5 9 India
7 Sep 2012 6:53PM

Quote:I suggest that if you feel so strongly about picture versus nature then photography is not for you

mikehit I would like to tell you that I am a Nature lover first and then a photographer. And without loving or feeling the beauty of Nature it is impossible for me to become a photographer. I really didn't understand what makes you use the word "picture vs nature". Even in my wildest of my dreams I couldn't have think of such a word. I just wanted to say that I feel its totally impossible for anyone to capture anything which would look more beautiful than the actual natural scene in any snap. One may modify a picture at it's best but can't make it more beautiful than what it looked naturally. Anyway I guess different people have ways of thinking and mine seems to be quite different from youSmile
StrayCat 14 19.1k 3 Canada
7 Sep 2012 7:03PM
Is this another one of Boyd's disguises? This person is trying very hard to sound like someone not familiar with the English language, and doing a very poor job of it.
keith selmes 14 7.4k 1 United Kingdom
7 Sep 2012 7:56PM

Quote:next to impossible to capture a shot in any camera which is equal to what is captured by the human eye
You can get a lot with a camera that a human eye can't see without it. Natural colouirs by moonlight for example, the human eye can't see them.

Colour by moonlight https://www.ephotozine.com/user/keith-selmes-13388/gallery/photo/night-tree-1662002

and again https://www.ephotozine.com/user/keith-selmes-13388/gallery/photo/silent-night-1712812
pulsar69 14 1.6k 6 United Kingdom
8 Sep 2012 1:02AM
In modern photography whether the shot is produced by angling the camera or angling and cropping the raw file is immaterial , so aswell the difference between dodging burning and the old lab works , and at the end of the day the ONLY thing that matters is the result and how it is received. Not the process of getting there, anyone who does not embrace digital photography may aswell give it up.
ade_mcfade 14 15.2k 216 England
8 Sep 2012 10:44AM
I've taken about 3000 photos this week - so I try to minimise the time spent editing in Photoshop Wink I like to see the outside of my house and other people occasionally, being glued to the graphics tablet isn't my idea of heaven Wink

When I was taking 50 or so, as a hobbyist, I'd spend ages in photoshop meddling around with one image.

Maybe 1 in 50 photos I produce ever see Photoshop, most of what I need to do is available in lightroom, with its faster, more efficient tool box - that brush tool is genius, as is the Grad Tool for those dark skies.

There's nowt wrong with all that photo manipulation malarkey, go for it if you have the time and inclination - or indeed the clients willing to pay for that EXTRA time needed to do all the shopping.

My main "lament" would be that, based on observation, the community online tends towards the more "processed" end of the spectrum at the expense of the more "pure" - substitute with more appropriate word if you know one... Not really referring specifically to EPZ, more the general feel of the other sites I've sampled in the last year or 2.

A couple would be.....
1 - Pixoto's photo duels seem to promote images which remind me of Windows 3.1's "plasma power saver" colour scheme....
2 - 500px seems to promote eye popping nuclear sky scenes.....

Do whatever turns you on with your photography.... some get off on kit, some get off on the social side of group meets, some love perving over lovely young models, some love the solitude of sitting watching sunrises, some love the techy side of processing, some like arguing the toss and winning pointless debates, some just like taking photos....
mikehit 8 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
8 Sep 2012 3:51PM

Quote:One may modify a picture at it's best but can't make it more beautiful than what it looked naturally.

I don't think I said that but it seems you are so sensitive to this issue you are not really listening to what people are saying. What was trying to get across (and I believe others are) is that nature does not transfer in its entirety to the photographic medium and in that respect naure is not always photography-friendly. When we have a sensor that can capture double the dynamic range that we have at the moment then maybe, just maybe, the need for a lot of the post-processing will disappear and we will be able to see in a picture all the colour range of a sunset without selective processing.
peterjones Plus
16 4.7k 1 United Kingdom
8 Sep 2012 4:12PM

Quote:some love perving over lovely young models

I knew I was interested in photography for a reason .....Grin
User_Removed 8 4.6k 1 Scotland
8 Sep 2012 4:27PM

Quote:some love perving over lovely young models

I knew I was interested in photography for a reason .....Grin

It certainly provides an alternative meaning for "digital manipulation".


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.