I admit, I use Photoshop. A lot of my photos have been manipulated using Photoshop. If you look at my photos at my photoblog at Photoblog Vancouver, they are mostly Photoshopped.
Why? Simple, sometimes I can't get the proper color I want or actually see. When I walk around Vancouver, I don't always have the luxury of waiting for the right light. Sometimes things happen so fast, I don't have enough time to adjust my camera settings to get it right all the time.
So I adjust colors, levels, hue, saturation, contrast and crop my photos to get the effect and mood I want.
There are two schools of thoughts in photography, one that is okay with Photoshop and one that isn't. Me? I do whatever works.
I prefer to get it right SOOC (Straight Out Of the Camera). But since I only have a Canon SD880IS point and shoot camera, there is very little settings I have on it other than exposure compensation, white balance and some color adjustments.
Some photographers are so good, they can get most of what they want in camera with no post processing. Doing post processing with Photoshop is a big waste of time. If I can avoid doing it, I will.
My philosophy is this. I believe that you can do whatever you want to improve your photo as long as you don't misrepresent it. Meaning, you cannot say that the image is original SOOC(Straight Out Of the Camera) if it was digitally manipulated. You also can't say that the photograph you took was natural if you combined several photos together using Photoshop or other photo editing software.
Since photography was invented, it has always been manipulated to get the look that the photographer wants. Sometimes this is because of the limitations of the camera or the film or the photo paper. They use techniques like dodging(lighter), burning(darker), cropping or other developing techniques.
Using Photoshop allows you to erase, duplicate, dodge, burn and pretty much anything you can think of doing. Because of that, I'm not a purist about using Photoshop if it improves the photo.
In fact, Ansel Adams can be considered as not representing reality because his photos are in black and white. Nobody sees the world in black and white unless you're color blind. Ansel Adams also used dodging and burning to help improve his photos.
What I don't like is when you use Photoshop to edit a photograph intended for news. In news and journalism, one is supposed to represent the truth. So that is the only area I do not agree on using Photoshop.
I rather have an out of focus, bad composition original photo for news than a digitally manipulated photo to enhance the news. That's just plain wrong.
On my next post, I will show you some digitally manipulated photos represented as real in the news.
Why? Simple, sometimes I can't get the proper color I want or actually see. When I walk around Vancouver, I don't always have the luxury of waiting for the right light. Sometimes things happen so fast, I don't have enough time to adjust my camera settings to get it right all the time.
So I adjust colors, levels, hue, saturation, contrast and crop my photos to get the effect and mood I want.
There are two schools of thoughts in photography, one that is okay with Photoshop and one that isn't. Me? I do whatever works.
I prefer to get it right SOOC (Straight Out Of the Camera). But since I only have a Canon SD880IS point and shoot camera, there is very little settings I have on it other than exposure compensation, white balance and some color adjustments.
Some photographers are so good, they can get most of what they want in camera with no post processing. Doing post processing with Photoshop is a big waste of time. If I can avoid doing it, I will.
My philosophy is this. I believe that you can do whatever you want to improve your photo as long as you don't misrepresent it. Meaning, you cannot say that the image is original SOOC(Straight Out Of the Camera) if it was digitally manipulated. You also can't say that the photograph you took was natural if you combined several photos together using Photoshop or other photo editing software.
Since photography was invented, it has always been manipulated to get the look that the photographer wants. Sometimes this is because of the limitations of the camera or the film or the photo paper. They use techniques like dodging(lighter), burning(darker), cropping or other developing techniques.
Using Photoshop allows you to erase, duplicate, dodge, burn and pretty much anything you can think of doing. Because of that, I'm not a purist about using Photoshop if it improves the photo.
In fact, Ansel Adams can be considered as not representing reality because his photos are in black and white. Nobody sees the world in black and white unless you're color blind. Ansel Adams also used dodging and burning to help improve his photos.
What I don't like is when you use Photoshop to edit a photograph intended for news. In news and journalism, one is supposed to represent the truth. So that is the only area I do not agree on using Photoshop.
I rather have an out of focus, bad composition original photo for news than a digitally manipulated photo to enhance the news. That's just plain wrong.
On my next post, I will show you some digitally manipulated photos represented as real in the news.
Comments
Post a Comment