Too much Photoshop. Is it a good thing or a bad thing?

[jimmyd]

photoshop is a tool just like every other tool you use to create images. some people use PS, as a tool, in wonderous ways. others use it as a crutch. and others butcher their images with overuse of PS.

[StuHaluski]

an image isnt necessarily what you take a picture of.
<img src="http://www.stuhaluski.com/tosho/FunkyRoz.jpg" border="2" alt="" /><br />
<br />
<img src="http://www.stuhaluski.com/tosho/Gayle_5482.jpg" border="2" alt="" /><br />
<br />I'll be at HTL VI
http://www.hitthelodge.com/

[Photomart]

Any amount of Photoshop is bad if done improperly. When in the hands of a skilled artist or someone who really knows how to use Photoshop the results can be quite spectacular - regardless of how much Photoshop they used..

If you're a true photography purist, you should shoot all your images with a 50mm lens and use no filters or no post production burning or dodging. Adding a wide angle or telephoto lens ... or a filter ... manipulates the image..

If you bought a digital camera to shoot digital images then Photoshop is just another accessory .. like a lens or filter ... it manipulates the image.. Either learn how to use Photoshop properly, or find someone who can do it for you ... or go back to film! 100% of my clients (models and commercial) expect me to deliver them a perfect image ... and that means that I Photoshop everything!

Sure, most digital cameras can sharpen an image, or do some amount of auto contrast, auto levels or auto anyting ... but the processors inside your camera can't do it as well as Photoshop (in the hands of someone capable). Most "professional photographers" I know shoot in manual mode ... even though the camera has a automatic mode . And, most "pros" I know turn off all the "auto corrections" features of their camera and do all that in Photoshop.

I view the use of Photoshop like the special effects in a movie. Sure, we all can spot computer generated special effects when they show up like dinosaurs in Jurassic Park ... but there are tons of special effects they you never notice ... because they're executed so expertly.

If people look at your images and "see" your Photoshop efforts, you're either doing an overt special effect or your not doing your Photoshop correctly. However, if they look at your images and love what they see, it doesn't matter how you got there, you've succeeded in making the client happy.

Of course, that's just my opinion ... and I use Photoshop on ALL my images!
.

[n5wd]

Originally Posted by Dman65

(snip)

So is it good, or right, or wrong. Does it then turn photography into graphic arts work?

Because there is no one person designated as the official photography czar, there's likely to never be just one answer to this question. But, I have to wonder why it matters, anyway?

If you're a photographic purist, you probably aren't shooting digital, anyway, since almost every digital image seems to need some post-processing.

IMHO, if you're shooting for a client who's paying the bill, you provide them with the image they want. If you're working with someone who isn't paying, but is still contributing time, energy, etc. then you provide them with images that suit their requirements (say, in a TFP situation). And if you're footing the bill entirely, then make images that fill your creative needs.

<center>



Yeah... it's Photoshopped? Wanna make something of it? </center>

[jimmyd]

here's three images that i shot but someone else processed in PS. the images are for various uses. personally, i'm not crazy about them as i think they lean more towards the "photoshop is a bad thing" side of things than the "photoshop is a good thing" side.