|
Forums >
General Industry >
Do you like photoshop, or natural images?
Something came to mind, and I just thought to ask the question. I know photoshop can do wonders for some. I want to know do you like use photoshop for all you images, or do you like natural images with minor photoshop? Which do you prefer natural beauty, or photoshop beauty? Nov 21 06 06:38 pm Link I use photoshop for some of my images and i find some of them are masterpieces to me straight from the camera. So i use both. Here is one of my raw images. https://www.modelmayhem.com/pic.php?pid=1685059 Nov 21 06 06:40 pm Link This should have been started in The Pit. It's as much a 'religious' war as anything else. Nov 21 06 06:40 pm Link Photography By Amaru wrote: Nice! Nov 21 06 06:42 pm Link Mikel Featherston wrote: Ditto - Nov 21 06 06:44 pm Link ...And here I thought we were gonna be talking about fossils. Because, any image made with a camera sure as hell isn't "natural" unless you see lenses growing on trees anywhere. What's "natural" about using graded paper? What's "natural" about using exposure and developmental contrast controls? What's "natural" about dodging and burning? What's "natural" about reversal printing from a negative? What's "natural" about an enlarger? What's "natural" about T-grain film instead of glass plate negatives? What's "natural" about studio lighting? What's "natural" about any of this? I know you probably meant "unmanipulated" (or something like that) but all the same questions apply. There's no such thing as a "natural" photograph. That's why we humans had to invent it. mjr. Nov 21 06 06:46 pm Link However you want to say it. Ok raw images. What if photoshop was not invented what would you do? Nov 21 06 06:48 pm Link There is tweaking, there is manipulating, and then there is over-photoshopping. I like the first 2, not a fan of the last Nov 21 06 06:48 pm Link All photography from the begining has used some form of manipulation either at the time of exposure(filters,dodge and burn in camera,brackett exposure) or after in the developement stage(contrast control,Zone system)or in the printing process(dodge,burn,cropping ,edge burn,contrast control with developement or filters,etc)Even chooseing what exposure based on shadows or highlites is manipulating the image for a desired result.Photoshop is just another methode,it is not unethical or unproffessional,it just is what it is.Weather you choose to use it is up to you. Nov 21 06 06:51 pm Link Photography By Amaru wrote: I'm glad they're masterpieces to you. To me, most of them look like they have severe contrast problems. Except for the ones that are blurry. Nov 21 06 06:52 pm Link i like both  Nov 21 06 06:52 pm Link What's a little photoshop? Simple color correction doesn't really count.. Usually a "little" photoshop is grab an image.. Use one or two canned filters on the whole file that produce..... Ick.. The stuff everyone complains about.. Get into the tool or get out of the tool.. To me it's no better than people who argue that film is pure, then send all their rolls off to some lab somewhere to do the processing for them.. Yet still crow that the results are all their doing... Nov 21 06 06:53 pm Link I would have to say both... Photoshopography! Nov 21 06 06:56 pm Link ...preferance-au natural. I respect, however, all forms of expression. Nov 21 06 06:56 pm Link urheartsdesire2 wrote: All depends on the photo. Some I 'shop the shit out of, some I don't. Nov 21 06 06:56 pm Link urheartsdesire2 wrote: I'd be doing all my manipulation in the darkroom exactly like I used to (and still do!) Nov 21 06 06:57 pm Link Rossi Photography wrote: lmao....Yea one must really need it. Nov 21 06 06:58 pm Link I do like chocolate. Nov 21 06 06:58 pm Link luciano Mello wrote: What kind? Twix, M&M's, Whatchamakalit....lol Nov 21 06 07:01 pm Link I don't get it -- that's like asking -- do you like your fish cooked, or as Sashimi? If it's done right, it's all good! I will quibble with one thing -- your notion of "natural beauty." The fact is, cameras aren't very good at actually capturing "natural beauty." Their dynamic range is far too limited. And that's why a good print manipulated in a darkroom or photoshop is usually more successful at portraying what a human being sees, than your so-called "natural" image. Paul urheartsdesire2 wrote: Nov 21 06 07:02 pm Link stan wigmore photograph wrote: I agree..... Nov 21 06 07:04 pm Link urheartsdesire2 wrote: Well, yeah.. sure, I'll use it to fix mistakes, but I was referring more toward how 'artsy' I want to go with a photo. Nov 21 06 07:07 pm Link urheartsdesire2 wrote: natural beauty? you mean taking pictures of models with no makeup, with body hair (female)? i have a friend who thinks photography sucks--he's an artist. he prefers the old fashioned way, draw and paint. this is a guy who used to work as a printer making prints from Ansel Adam's glass plates. i didn't try to argue with him about it but tolerate his point. Nov 21 06 08:05 pm Link W.G. Rowland wrote: This expression usually means the photographer has Photoshop or Photoshop Elements, but they don't really know how to use it. Nov 21 06 08:14 pm Link photoshop done correctly can improve any image. but there is no point in using photoshop when you are not a good photographer. learn to get a good image , then learn how to edit it. i do not use photoshop im not good enough to be producing near perfect images. i do use the hell out of curves though !!!!! Nov 21 06 08:22 pm Link Photography By Amaru wrote: i can see chromatic aberration. if it was my photo, i'd remove it. Nov 21 06 08:23 pm Link "Bruce Lee " Use what is good and throw away the rest.. Works for me!! (:-------- Hj Nov 21 06 08:26 pm Link toan thai photography wrote: i really dont like that picture , but nobody on here likes my pictures. i think its a location driven social thing. Nov 21 06 08:28 pm Link My personal opinion is not to photoshop but to sell a product (calendar, postcard, or poster) some fotoshp is necessary. Models are turning more and more to it to point that when I look for a natural beauty for a project I'm not getting a true image of her/him. I quess some take it to the extreme and others like myself in everyday work don't use it at all. I even put it in my profiles and in so many words that perfection in itself is unachievable. Nov 21 06 10:33 pm Link urheartsdesire2 wrote: Yes. Nov 22 06 02:23 am Link darkfotoart wrote: Very true. Nov 22 06 02:39 am Link |
