Use PS or not??

[draudeleppur]

Hi to all of you,

I'm new to photography. And I'm excited about it. I have an Idea of my Pictures. I actually don't want to use any digital software for them. To make them look better. I actually want to keep my pictures real. So that they represent exactly the moment.

Is this now a mistake? And how many people are actually using a digital software??

[ravncat]

Welcome to Photographic Philosophies 101.

You have just asked the question that we can only really answer for ourselves.

There are groups of people that will support processing, and groups that dont. Some groups will support minimal processing - it's a huge spectrum.

It's important to create the images you want to create - if you need software to do it, then do it - if you can make the images you want to without software - then don't!

I will give you another question -

When is a picture "real" ?

- to answer your questions - I don't think it is a mistake. I use software.

[draudeleppur]

Originally Posted by ravncat

Welcome to Photographic Philosophies 101.

You have just asked the question that we can only really answer for ourselves.

There are groups of people that will support processing, and groups that dont. Some groups will support minimal processing - it's a huge spectrum.

I guess minimal processing is ok.

It's important to create the images you want to create - if you need software to do it, then do it - if you can make the images you want to without software - then don't!

I will give you another question -

When is a picture "real" ?

Good question, i guess everybody has another point of view about real pictures.

- to answer your questions - I don't think it is a mistake. I use software.

I think this with the software is like what to use Canon or Nikon. At the end of the day, everybody need to decide for them self. Me I will try to avoid it, as much as possible.

[RichardTaylor]

I process all my pics (I don't shoot jpg).
Also I do not know where the final pic will be used, web or print, so I don't have to make an in camera decision re sharpening.

Sometimes it will be very minimal processing, I try to get it right in camera, and sometimes it will be a lot.
I do what ever it takes to get the desired final picture.

[Elmo]

Point of fact is you shoot digital you will use software. It is required to convert digital data to something visual. This will either be in camera or post processing. But in answer to your question, I am a post processing minimalist. As the word photography means painting with light. Anything beyond that becomes computer graphics.

[draudeleppur]

Originally Posted by Elmo

Point of fact is you shoot digital you will use software. It is required to convert digital data to something visual. This will either be in camera or post processing. But in answer to your question, I am a post processing minimalist. As the word photography means painting with light. Anything beyond that becomes computer graphics.

This I totally agree!!!

[WooD]

I use photoshop to make a good image better. As in fixing a blown out sky, removing blemishes, and stray hairs on models, plus anything else that it will do to enhance the image.

[Photologyst]

One of the reasons that photography is often criticized is because for some, it is merely a reflection of reality. Taking a snap is not seen as a skill or art.

However, as an art form, the photo absolutely needs to be manipulated to reflect the artist’s vision. All the great photographers of the past used the chemical darkroom to literally make their photos reflect their personal vision. Today, photographers use the digital “light room.” Those that are considered art are often heavily manipulated: http://www.asa100.com/

The, I want to keep things natural, school of thought always reminds me of women whom my husband calls the back to nature types. These women refuse to do anything to change their “natural” state because they consider it unatural, including not grooming themselves; therewith forgetting that every culture since the caveman has done that including body ornamentation via scarifying or tattooing, body painting, extension or changing of body parts such as holes in the earlobes and rings on the necks of women to elongate these. The list is endless as to what “natural” beauty is and how mankind attains and reflects that.

Animals groom themselves and produce beauty in order to attract a mate and have status in their community—same as human beings. Check out the nests of the “bowerbird.” http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&c...w=1228&bih=734

The “natural” state is in the eyes of the beholder, just as beauty is.

Therefore, manipulate your photos or not to reflect your personal artistic vision.

[LoveDSLR]

You are thinking liked Henri Cartier-Bresson. Here's one of his quotes:

"Actually, I'm not at all interested in the subject of photography. Once the picture is in the box, I'm not all that interested in what happens next. Hunters, after all, aren't cooks."

However, I'm not at his 'hunter' level yet.

[jml79]

Remember that no photography is pure. The medium has never been as capable an observer as the human eye. Many decisions about how an image should look are made by the companies that make the camera. What compromises should be made in the sensor, how should the camera process and record the sensors data, etc, etc. Even in manual mode if you take a Canon, Nikon, and Olympus. Put them all on tripods next to each other and put the same lens on them set an exposure and trigger them all at the same time, each will look slightly different. The same could be done with film by using 3 different brands of film.

Post processing is how I make my camera really do what I want. I might be able to get close by playing with all of the different settings in the camera but then I am going to go outside and it will all be wrong. Much easier to shoot raw and do some PP.