Views on use of photoshop to improve pics

[kirisute]

And don't forget in the pre-digital days you were at the mercy of whoever developed the negatives and produced the prints, even home developers would adjust the process to get the desired result, a sort of primitive photoshop. I use CS to a very limited extent, mainly auto levels and sharpen and I'm comfortable doing that, I'd use it more if I knew how to.

 

Here's an example of a blemish cloned out, does it detract from the photo do you think?

 

 

The original;

 

Not at all, but your not altering the fish! What if you added size to the fish to make it bigger, fatter etc?

You would do so purely to deceive your audience...it wouldn't be the fish you photographed! Same with most magazine covers!

Two of my photos happened to win a competition last weekend! They were cropped and adjusted in photoshop but nothing more than that! I wouldn't feel happy, personally, entering an image if it had more advanced photoshop editing within it.

[Clifftop]

At some of the local shows here there are two photography sections.

 

1 is unedited

2 is edited.

 

It's still largely comes down to the person entering the photograph being honest i think.

 

The prize is small so the comps mainly attract the amateur photographer.

On a personal note i do use photoshop to the best of my ability.

[kirisute]

At some of the local shows here there are two photography sections.

 

1 is unedited

2 is edited.

 

It's still largely comes down to the person entering the photograph being honest i think.

 

The prize is small so the comps mainly attract the amateur photographer.

On a personal note i do use photoshop to the best of my ability.

I can and do use photoshop to utterly change photos! I've removed heads, changed shadows tidied up a brides hairdo, changed cloudy to sunny and everything in between! And most of the time people looking wont know the difference!

If the client wants it then they get it! Photoshop is a tool and it's great to use it...but I think the media needs to be transparent in its use!

[corydoras]

...but I think the media needs to be transparent in its use!

Why? What's the difference between using Photoshop to post-process a digital image and the indian inking, push/pull processing, air-brushing, processing films with different chemicals (for example putting a standard B&W through a C41 colour process), posterizing etc, etc that was done prior to digital photography?

[kirisute]

Why? What's the difference between using Photoshop to post-process a digital image and the indian inking, push/pull processing, air-brushing, processing films with different chemicals (for example putting a standard B&W through a C41 colour process), posterizing etc, etc that was done prior to digital photography?

Depends on the photoshopping...I'm referring to the physical changes to a given form. Not the cosmetic changes to tone or colour etc.

The level of change has multiplied considerably, airbrushing was never used to the extent you see photoshopping these days. Sure it was used to smooth skin and suchlike but not to significantly alter the models physical shape or size.

I used to do a shed lad of airbrushing and it's a tough job to do well. Photoshop levels that skill level...almost to the extent where you really have to question what your seeing.....

For a person with an ounce of sense that's ok....sadly joe public is full to the brim with plankton who only see as far as the arse of the sheep in front of them! They believe the cover of Vogue actually exists and they can look like that too... IMHO that's when photoshop becomes an issue.

It's not the issue of photoshopping images...it's the issue of pushing a photoshopped image out as reality.

[corydoras]

Photoshop levels that skill level.

I disagree. Photoshop is an extremely complex piece of image processing software. I'd wager that less than 5% of Photoshop users use less than 95% of the functionality of the software. If one only uses Photoshop to adjust levels and contrast then one is wasting an lot of money. There are many programs that will do this for much less money than a Photoshop license cost.

[kirisute]

I disagree. Photoshop is an extremely complex piece of image processing software. I'd wager that less than 5% of Photoshop users use less than 95% of the functionality of the software. If one only uses Photoshop to adjust levels and contrast then one is wasting an lot of money. There are many programs that will do this for much less money than a Photoshop license cost.

very true but having said that photoshop elements is usually a freebie with printer/scanners and will do some pretty advanced stuff with one click....my statement wasnt so much to suggest photoshop was easy as to say that old airbrushing skills by hand took years to master and perfect! photoshop, to obtain pretty decent results that the average joe would find acceptable takes far less time!

[Rusty]

....sadly joe public is full to the brim with plankton who only see as far as the arse of the sheep in front of them!....

 

AN quote of the month

[kirisute]

AN quote of the month

Hehehe in not known for my love of the public