Photoshopping, a good or bad thing to do?

[warden]

my question is could it have been filmed if no film was involved ?

Yep. They didn't need film, or that kid, or the warehouse.

 

[removed account4]

Yep. They didn't need film, or that kid, or the warehouse.

we live in such strange and creative times, real live alchemists are afoot !

 

[Pieter12]

Yep. They didn't need film, or that kid, or the warehouse.

But they did need many, many collaborators, equipment and funds to produce it, working long, hard hours, the majority more talented than I or most anyone else on this forum.

 

[warden]

But they did need many, many collaborators, equipment and funds to produce it, working long, hard hours, the majority more talented than I or most anyone else on this forum.

Of course. The budget was $175 million, give or take.

 

[awty]

I preffer the 1942 version in Technicolour.

 

[markjwyatt]

So by dodging shadows on a face or a side of a building, you are introducing a lighting situation that did not exist naturally at the time. FAKE! This whole discussion is so ridiculous. Go out and take some photos!

Actually, in this case the dodged shadow may look more natural than the un-dodged because the resulting print would look closer to what the eye saw.

 

[RPC]

can you please show examples of the work that has been debased / devalued?

There surely are many out there who prefer real images to fake ones, and the existence and potential prevalence of fabricated images dilutes the value real images may have to them, if they cannot separate real from fake. For example a photographer attempting to sell his/her real images in a marketplace full of fakes, where the buyers prefer real ones, and do not know they are fake. In addition, more competition is created between the fakers themselves, as faking becomes more prevalent, so any value their work may have gets diluted as well.

 

[Craig75]

There are definite moral implications in manipulating photographs in advertising and personally i think rest of the world should have followed frances lead in insisting on photos of manipulated women in adverts being labelled as such.

Similarly instragram is awash with photoshopped lifestyle bollocks. Its allowed everyone to become their own pravda to hustle kids on the 'gram.

Magnum photographers have been busted too i think with some shockingly crap photoshops.

I am a firm believer in very highly manipulated photos but there is a dark and evil side to it too so i am very sympathetic to people who quest for a "purity" or verite or what have you

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I'm finding I like my home produced digital movies and slide shows of vacations and travel and parties shown with stills and short video clips with my music , titles. and credits added. They're personal, creative, and mine. No one can copy them. Shooting forests, mountains, sunsets, and tree roots like a million other guys have done is getting boring, lacks individuality. isn't as good as theirs, etc. AI and PS production of landscape and other pictures may just kill regular photography as people just go back into family and people shots which will have more meaning to them. The competition is now who can Photoshop better rather than who can take better more meaningful pictures with a camera.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Yep. They didn't need film, or that kid, or the warehouse.

Everyone here owns a camera. Arguing that photography doesn't need a camera isn't what we're about. If I could draw, I'd take up watercolors.

 

[warden]

Everyone here owns a camera. Arguing that photography doesn't need a camera isn't what we're about. If I could draw, I'd take up watercolors.

The argument about physical cameras for motion pictures has been settled for years; the terms Director of Photography and Cinematographer are used both for live action films and those that are completely CG. Still image photography hasn't done that yet but perhaps one day it will.

I don't care either way, for what it's worth. I'm not in competition with anyone, and have nothing to protect. I prefer old school film photography personally, but if anyone wants to call a CG image a photograph that's ok by me.

 

[faberryman]

We are now eight pages into another film vs. digital thread. Has anyone become a better photographer by participating in it?

 

[eddie]

Has anyone become a better photographer by participating in it?

I found out I may not actually be a photographer, based on the definitions of some members.

 

[RPC]

how about instead of name calling and sour grapes you don't worry about the image making process someone else might use and you just make great photographs the way you want? calling photographers "fakes" is a bit much just because you don't like their work.

The idea of fake anything turns many people off, especially when they are not told of the fakery. In the case of photogrraphs, I believe you can call it art if the viewer is aware, but if not, then it is not art or photography it is fiction and deception. What about news and literature? What if people applied your logic to those? We have heard about fake news these days, what's wrong with that? A jounalists may fabricate or embellish the news to sell more papers or get higher ratings or control your thinking, and you wouldn't know. You can bet that happens. You may not like that thought, but hey, they don't care; they have their reasons for deceiving you and will continue to do it without your knowing so you can't do much about it. I don't want that sort of thinking prevalent in photography.

Who knows might kind of implications there may be with someome led to believe something is real when it isn't whether it is news, books, articles, or photographs. Fake is never good if people believe it is real.

 

[warden]

We are now eight pages into another film vs. digital thread. Has anyone become a better photographer by participating in it?

I am learning things in this thread. I mean if that's ok with you. The things I learn might help me and other people here in one way or another with photography/art/life/etc. I hope that's also ok.

P.S. This is your sole contribution to this thread. Has your participation made you a better photographer?

 

[faberryman]

I am learning things in this thread. I mean if that's ok with you. The things I learn might help me and other people here in one way or another with photography/art/life/etc. I hope that's also ok.

P.S. This is your sole contribution to this thread. Has your participation made you a better photographer?

Reading through one of these threads from time to time reminds me of the advantages of maintaining cognitive flexibility.

 

[MattKing]

Is there anything related to photography that one can productively define as being either always good or always bad?

 

[warden]

Reading through one of these threads from time to time reminds me of the advantages of maintaining cognitive flexibility.

Good. That might improve your photography, assuming that’s why you’re here.

 

[faberryman]

Good. That might improve your photography, assuming that’s why you’re here.

There is lots of good information here on the technical side of film processing and printing. I still don't know whether using stop bath or a water rinse is best though. There seems to be a lot of disagreement on that issue too. I use stop bath out of habit, but if I ran out, I would just use a water rinse.

 

[jtk]

personally I don't think photographic images made with color negative or chrome film should be called photographs because they are not black and white, do I care that you and other vocal posters make them or if you call your work photographs? I don't. Keep enjoying yourself and making what you want and I will make some cameraless works made with self applied brushed chemistry and call them photographs too.[/QUOTE]

Chromes are always "B&:W" unless/until they're chemically processed abnormally.

 

[Pieter12]

Everyone here owns a camera. Arguing that photography doesn't need a camera isn't what we're about. If I could draw, I'd take up watercolors.

Watercolor painting is so much more than about the ability to draw. It is a demanding medium. And talk about the ability to alter an image--watercolor is very unforgiving, what you put down with your brush is very difficult to change.o

 

[urnem57]

Professional Photojournalism is really the only discipline in photography where manipulating an image (other than image quality adjustments of existing data) is cause for dismissal. Other than that, it’s all fair game. Who’s going to fire me, anyway?

 

[Pieter12]

Professional Photojournalism is really the only discipline in photography where manipulating an image (other than image quality adjustments of existing data) is cause for dismissal. Other than that, it’s all fair game. Who’s going to fire me, anyway?

Rather, no one will hire you if you can't do some retouching/adjustments in photoshop!

 

[grat]

I've made a couple references to this one, but here, I'll call it out explicitly:

What's the opinion on one of the most famous doctored landscape photos of all time?

https://www.slrlounge.com/wp-conten...-adams-winter-sunrise-sierra-nevada-holly.png

https://focusonphotography.blogspot.com/2008/07/ansel-adams-and-lone-pine-photograph.html

 

[Pieter12]

I've made a couple references to this one, but here, I'll call it out explicitly:

What's the opinion on one of the most famous doctored landscape photos of all time?

https://www.slrlounge.com/wp-conten...-adams-winter-sunrise-sierra-nevada-holly.png

https://focusonphotography.blogspot.com/2008/07/ansel-adams-and-lone-pine-photograph.html

Who really cares?