Photoshopping, a good or bad thing to do?

grat · Jun 20, 2021

Well, let's see... first, it's relevant to "photoshop? Good or bad?" since it's a well-documented, pre-photoshop, example of a photographer altering the final print.

Secondly, a couple of people in this thread have stated unequivocally, that anyone who modifies or manipulates their photographs is a faker, a hack, a charlatan, and their work isn't actually photography.

jtk · Jun 20, 2021

Obviously selenium toner and polycontrast papers make the user a non-photographer.

removed account4 · Jun 21, 2021

mtjade2007 said:
I believe post processing with Photoshop after films are processed and scanned is a common thing to do. It is common the initial scan of the film yields images requiring some editing, cropping, density and color adjustments. But there are people who insist in not photoshopping or only do it at a minimum degree. I personally usually only photoshop to adjust the overall density (like adjusting exposure), color balance. I almost never do sharpening nor color saturation boosting, etc.

However, I recently realized that the scanned images from films are already heavily tweaked by the scanner and you really don't know what were done by the scanner at all. If one want's to evaluate a film's color characteristics, or evaluate how the film process was done (to judge if a film is bad or the chemicals used in the process is bad for example) the best way to do it is to have the film (negatives) to print a RA-4 paper. This makes sense so this is not my question. My questions is if I scan my films should I phtoshop the images to yield reasonable image quality.

I often shot scenery with Kodak 160/400 NC films for the reason these films have a wide dynamic exposure range so that I could capture highlights and not losing shadows as well. The problem is these films tend to yield lower color saturation. I know they are designed that way. I found I could boost the color saturation by photoshop. The result usually is amazing. Even if I shot with 160/400 UC further boosting color saturation would yield magical results. But then here comes the question is it a good thing to do? I could shoot with my Canon 5D full frame and the images will come out with full blown colors. So if digital cameras do it why not I photoshop my films? Any comment is welcomed. Thank you.

OP
Use that photo editing software at your own risk. …but be advised your work and your reputation may suffer the slings and arrows of people who might be jealous of your imagery and call you a fraud or fake and make all sorts of comments and commentary about your motives and intent. They may suggest you are a con artist even if you just dust your scans and boost the contrast too. Sadly there are people who have extreme views on the subject and insult people for the slightest bit of creativity.
On second thought you might not want to even the most minute adjustments it might not be worth the Ill will / shade said orthodox photographers might throw your way …
Ymmv

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

Are people here saying that scanning your film to create digital images is okay, but using PS after you have done so renders the resulting images fake? I thought you pretty much lost the moral high ground once you pressed the scan button.

Sirius Glass · Jun 21, 2021

jnantz said:
you obviously have not read the photographic history books listed for you in the other thread
photographs just require light that's it, it honest or dishonest scissor and glue or photoshop have nothing to do with it
you are making up your own definition of photography? yours is not the generally accepted definition since 1826.

And if they jumped off ten story building you would do it too? George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, so are you going to be a slave owner too? Your argument is senseless drivel, but in your heart you know that too.

Sirius Glass · Jun 21, 2021

jnantz said:
the thing is they also manipulate the hell out of their work in other ways but refuse to acknowledge what they do.
oh well. ..

I acknowledge the practice but I do not condone it. Some of them breathed in Mercury fumes, but I will not, and you are free to do that too.

Sirius Glass · Jun 21, 2021

jnantz said:
OP
Use that photo editing software at your own risk. …but be advised your work and your reputation may suffer the slings and arrows of people who might be jealous of your imagery and call you a fraud or fake and make all sorts of comments and commentary about your motives and intent. They may suggest you are a con artist even if you just dust your scans and boost the contrast too. Sadly there are people who have extreme views on the subject and insult people for the slightest bit of creativity.
On second thought you might not want to even the most minute adjustments it might not be worth the Ill will / shade said orthodox photographers might throw your way …
Ymmv

Hardly jealous. How can one be jealous of someone who does not have the wherewithal to properly compose a photograph without cutting and pasting. Oh so lamebrained. Fakin' it, not makin' it ...

Fakin’ It
Simon & Garfunkel “Fakin' It” was one of Simon’s and Garfunkel’s single releases in 1967. Its B-side was “You Don’t Know Where Your Interest Lies,” the duo’s only non-LP track which made its…

[Verse 1]
When she goes, she's gone
If she stays, she stays here
The girl does what she wants to do
She knows what she wants to do
And I know I'm fakin' it
I'm not really makin' it

[Verse 2]
I'm such a dubious soul
And a walk in the garden
Wears me down
Tangled in the fallen vines
Picking up the punch lines
I've just been fakin' it
Not really makin' it

[Verse 3]
Is there any danger?
No, no, not really
Just lean on me
Taking time to treat
Your friendly neighbors honestly
I've just been fakin' it, fakin' it
Not really makin' it
This feeling of fakin' it--
I still haven't shaken it
[Verse 4]
Prior to this lifetime
I surely was a tailor, look at me...
("Good morning, Mr. Leitch
Have you had a busy day?")
I own the tailor's face and hands
I am the tailor's face and hands
I know I'm fakin' it, fakin' it
I'm not really makin' it
This feeling of fakin' it--
I still haven't shaken it, shaken it
I know I'm fakin' it
I'm not really makin' it

Such a pity that you just not do it on your own. Sad.

removed account4 · Jun 21, 2021

hi faberryman
removal of dust and boosting contrast saturation seems to be OK ..
but anything more than that is fake art.
But you know, Answel Addams is allowed to do it because its him... no one else because they are all
masters of deception, con artists and cheats who are passing off cobbled together fake-news as reality
and diluting the value of all photography.

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

albireo said:
This is really surprising. Do you really - truly - not get it? Or are you just trying to start a flame war? There are hundreds of reasons. Hundreds. Start with a little search on youtube to get you started.

Maybe there are hundreds of reasons for shooting film and scanning it. I must have read all the wrong ones because they didn't seem all that compelling to me. They are mostly "I like the look of film". And I try to avoid YouTube. Who wants to listen to some guy drone on for a half an hour saying he likes the look of film? If you like shooting film and scanning it, and whatever else it is that you do after scanning it, knock yourself out. They are your images. Make them any way you want.

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

Sirius Glass said:
Hardly jealous. How can one be jealous of someone who does not have the wherewithal to properly compose a photograph without cutting and pasting. Oh so lamebrained. Fakin' it, not makin' it ...

Do you like listening to Simon and Garfunkel when you are in the darkroom? I generally don't have music on until I start washing my prints.

Sirius Glass · Jun 21, 2021

faberryman said:
Do you like listening to Simon and Garfunkel when you are in the darkroom? I generally don't have music on until I start washing my prints.

No I have not bothered to play music in the darkroom.

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

Sirius Glass said:
And if they jumped off ten story building you would do it too?

That's what my father asked me when I told him I wanted to have long hair like the Beatles. I just sort of looked at him wondering if he had lost his mind. What does jumping off a ten story building have to do with wanting to wear your hair long, or in this case manipulating a image?

Sirius Glass · Jun 21, 2021

faberryman said:
That's what my father asked me when I told him I wanted to have long hair like the Beatles. I just sort of looked at him wondering if he had lost his mind. What does jumping off a ten story building have to do with wanting to wear your hair long, or in this case manipulating a image?

The point is just because someone else did something does not mean that you should blindly do the same.

removed account4 · Jun 21, 2021

faberryman said:
thought you pretty much lost the moral high ground once you pressed the scan button.

And now I was told via PM that there is some sort of moral equivalency between jumping off of a building (committing suicide), owning slaves and of course making creative photographs.
It’s amazing and he nonsense people say. The internet really brings out the worst in people.

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

Sirius Glass said:
No I have not bothered to play music in the darkroom.

You probably have one of those fancy print washers where you can just leave the water running for a couple of hours and go do something else. If you were shuffling your prints around and changing the water in the trays you would want to have some music on to relieve the tedium.

Sirius Glass · Jun 21, 2021

faberryman said:
You probably have one of those fancy print washers where you can just leave the water running for a couple of hours and go do something else. If you were shuffling your prints around and changing the water in the trays you would want to have some music on to relieve the tedium.

I did purchase one of these print washers that I put in the bathtub. I have the water run gently for 30 minutes to save water.

albireo · Jun 21, 2021

faberryman said:
Maybe there are hundreds of reasons for shooting film and scanning it. I must have read all the wrong ones because they didn't seem all that compelling to me.

Good. Then why not just move on? You're in a hybrid section and you don't care about scanned film and those who like doing it - yet, you seem to be interested enough to comment multiple times.

Enjoy your fine art prints.

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

Sirius Glass said:
The point is just because someone else did something does not mean that you should blindly do the same.

You mean just because someone else makes his images using an all analog process does not mean I should blindly do the same. I'll go along with that. I create my images using all analog processes, all digital processes, and a variety of hybrid processes depending on what I am trying to achieve.

Algo después · Jun 21, 2021

I have followed this thread with attention at the beginning, and now not so much; At this point the OP has probably already finished his photos but the dilemma remains open. It is clear that here there will be no agreement, each one will defend their position trying to educate on the good and bad use of the term "photography" authentic, real and so on. etc. when in reality we all know that even photography from the beginning, even in its documentary nature, is a cut from reality, an abstraction of life, reduced to a problem of framing, etc. From Cartier Bresson to Kevin Carter, the photos make us think that things happened like this, their power of conviction is such that it still makes some of us fall into their traps, not only when it is post-produced. But this is great on the one hand. Personally, I am drawn to the fact that these technical advances prolong the conflict of what a real photo is.

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

albireo said:
Good. Then why not just move on? You're in a hybrid section and you don't care about scanned film and those who like doing it - yet, you seem to be interested enough to comment multiple times.

Enjoy your fine art prints.

I do all kinds of stuff, all analog, all digital, and hybrid. I don't do much color film scanning though. I am probably not a good color film scanner because the colors all look wrong and then I have to spend time fixing them in PS. Some of them are irredeemable. Oh, and I like to think all of my prints, regardless of process, are fine art prints, not that I want to have a conversation about the definition of art, much less the definition of fine art.

Algo después · Jun 21, 2021

...to add fuel to the fire: this work by Sherry Levine (After Walker Evans, 1981). The photograph of a photo from a Walker Evans book.

As a background, in order to present the New Deal Roosevelt, he commissioned Roy Stryker to hire renowned photographers to produce a documentary record of the America deep. There are works of this commission that cast doubt on the reality of the events, since in some cases, actors were hired, as in the case of the photograph "Migrant mother" by Dorothea Lange. What is reality ?

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

Algo después said:
As a background, in order to present the New Deal Roosevelt, he commissioned Roy Stryker to hire renowned photographers to produce a documentary record of the America deep. There are works of this commission that cast doubt on the reality of the events, since in some cases, actors were hired, as in the case of the photograph "The mother" by Dorothea Lange. What is reality?

This is the first I've heard that the woman in Dorothea Lange's Migrant Mother was a hired actress. I thought her name was Florence Owens Thompson and she was a migrant worker. There is a write up about her in Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Owens_Thompson

I guess you can't believe everything you read on the internet.

Pieter12 · Jun 21, 2021

faberryman said:
This is the first I've heard that the woman in Dorothea Lange's Migrant Mother was a hired actress. I thought her name was Florence Owens Thompson and she was a migrant worker. There is a write up about her in Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Owens_Thompson

I guess you can't believe everything you read on the internet.

Certainly not unsubstantiated claims in forums.

grat · Jun 21, 2021

I think the OP's answer is "Do whatever you want, because someone is going to be offended no matter what you do, so just roll with it".

Also, "You won't get a meaningful discussion here, so see point #1".

faberryman · Jun 21, 2021

jnantz said:
hi faberryman
removal of dust and boosting contrast saturation seems to be OK ..
but anything more than that is fake art.

I think what you are referring to is the Three Slider Rule. There was a huge debate about it a while back. The ideologues said you could only use the exposure, contrast, and sharpen sliders. Anything more and the image was fake. More liberal minded advocates of the rule said you could use any three sliders, but not more than three. So, for example, the Fauves went with hue, saturation and tint. I'm not sure how it all turned out.

Photoshopping, a good or bad thing to do?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency