The Wider Angle
View Single Post
02-06-12, 05:42 PM
Join Date: May 2012
Originally Posted by
Here is something simple. Google would Ansel Adams use photoshop? Read some of the results, they overwhelmingly point to yes. Taking the photo in the camera has always only been part of it. Yes, the most important part, but still only part. Without darkroom manipulation, many of Adam's photos would not be considered as great as they are today.
I am not saying "do not manipulate" - there are very few photographs that cannot be improved slightly by use of Photoshop or any other editing program; what I
saying is that too much manipulation and the production of digital art from a photograph is not photography, and the results are not photographs. There was a wonderful example of Adams' "Moonrise over Hernandez" in one of the magazines a few months back, which showed a straight print from the negative and Adams' final result; yes, there were local changes to the contrast and exposure of the original negative, but nowhere was there any evidence of serious manipulation that now seems to be the norm for digital imaging.
As I said in my original post, there is room for all types of photographer, all I am asking for is some balance in the opinions of those who should know better, like "expert" columnists, that there are those who do not wish to over-manipulate their photographs and those that do. Live and let live and accept the other man's point of view.
View Forum Profile
Send a private message to roy5051
Find all posts by roy5051