why do we care about being good photographers?

[smittymike19]

Really, it seems like it is unneccesary to have all of this technical knowledge. If you know the basics and can work photoshop, you can have beautiful pictures all the time. Its to the point that a decent photographer with excellent computer skills can beat a great photographer with bad computer skills.

[PacAce]

I'm inclined to disagree with you there. Like someone said, "Garbage in, garbage out"! :)

[FlipsidE]

I must agree with PacAce. There's a lot more to photography than just exposure. Composition as well as posing (if portraits) go a long way. Plus, if ya blow out the sky too much on a shot, ya can't accurately reflect what was there with photoshop. You can take a good guess and add clouds, but ya just can't accurately fix what wasn't recorded.

FlipsidE

[CaseyScofield]

sorry do disagree with you Smitty...but I'm inclined to agree with Pac & Flip. Photoshop is good...but not a cure all for everything. I've taken many a horrible picture that no amount of Photoshoping would cure.

[cactusclay]

Without design principals photos are pretty much just snap shots.

[blinking8s]

Without design principals photos are pretty much just snap shots.

well said...

[robertwgross]

I know a restaurant that has a number of large framed outdoor photos hanging on the walls. There are cut sheets available that describe the photographer and his work. Then it tells you how and where to order prints. I have the feeling that this guy's work sells. When I first saw them, I thought "Wow!"

However, I have been back there twice, and I studied them a little closer. In my view, the only thing great about them is the amount of color saturation that this guy cranked up. They look like a Super-Velvia on steroids, and I find them rather unnatural. One had the look of "Elvis painted on black velvet" if you know what I mean.

So, do you want to go by how successful your banker says you are, or do you want to go by the smiles on customer's faces? Or would you go by how many repeat customers the photographer has?

---Bob Gross---

[Persian-Rice]

Smitty, photography is not computer graphics, its photography.

If a picture doesnt look that good out of the camera, it will never look good. Ya, you can fix it with hours of Photoshop, but then its not a photograph anymore. Maybe to an average amateur photographs can be "fixed", but you can't use that excuse when you are a pro sports shooter or photojournalist. Even a fashion shooter doesnt fix a picture, they enhance it. There is no time to fix screw ups, you either get it right or you trash it.

If you (not "you" in particular, anybody) think that shooting RAW at any random setting and fixing it in Photoshop is photography, you are not photographer, and to me, don't really have a respect for the art either. I think, and many agree, this is the biggest downside to digital, everyone thinks they are photographer with Photoshop. You can burn half of someones face in Photoshop and call it a shadow, but doing it via some lighting and exposure is what counts.

I have the opinion that the difference between a "beautiful" and "stunning" photo is found in the amount of manipulation you do, or better, the amount you don't do.

[pradeep1]

Really, it seems like it is unneccesary to have all of this technical knowledge. If you know the basics and can work photoshop, you can have beautiful pictures all the time. Its to the point that a decent photographer with excellent computer skills can beat a great photographer with bad computer skills.

Maybe a poor photographer with excellent computer skills can beat a mediocre photographer with bad computer skills, but I have not seen it being done the way you described it. But an excellent photographer with excellent computer skills can beat an excellent photographer with bad computer skills. I've seen that before. :cool:

[Scottes]

Ansel Adams must be a computer genius.

[Ballen Photo]

Ansel Adams must be a computer genius.

I think THIS (tongue in cheek) speaks volumes! ;)
-Bruce

[am_pitbull_terrier]

I'm inclined to disagree with you there. Like someone said, "Garbage in, garbage out"! :)

or.... "You cant polish a turd" :)

[Jon]

Yet another in favor of the photographer rather than the PhotoShopper. If you didn't get it in the field, you won't be able to fix it up in the lab. Consider, as the extreme case, a photojournalist. These days, he's sending his take back to the editor via cell or sat phone. If he didn't get it, and get it usable, in the camera the editor's not going have it PhotoShopped so she can use it. She'll use someone else's work, and remember that in the future.

[12345Michael54321]

Its to the point that a decent photographer with excellent computer skills can beat a great photographer with bad computer skills.
Perhaps. Arguably. But I suspect a great photographer with excellent computer skills will beat them both.

Much the same way that back in the days of film photography (when dinosaurs roamed the Earth), one could maintain that a decent photographer with excellent darkroom skills could beat a great photographer with poor darkroom skills. But a photographer who was good in both realms was generally the best of the three.

The fact is, post-shoot manipulation - whether in a darkroom or on a computer - can do a great deal to help an image. But such manipulation is not all powerful. And it often comes at the expense of impairing some image quality characteristics, in an effort to compensate for the worst of the errors.

Finally, I would note that even if all one needed was to "know the basics," probably 98% of camera owners don't know the basics. (We've reached the point where if someone have even a vague understanding of how aperture and shutter speed are related, he'll proclaim himself at least an advanced amateur, if not a "semi pro" photographer.)

[robertwgross]

Ansel Adams must be a computer genius.

I'm afraid he is no longer at the keyboard.

---Bob Gross---

[12345Michael54321]

Or is it that that's what Da Man wants us to believe?

First Elvis, then Ansel Adams, and most recently Hunter S. Thompson... Am I the only one who suspects an Alien/Government Conspiracy here?

[Scottes]

Aliens are good at computers?

:wink:


Elvis has left the keyboard!

[Monito]

Really, it seems like it is unneccesary to have all of this technical knowledge. If you know the basics and can work photoshop, you can have beautiful pictures all the time. Its to the point that a decent photographer with excellent computer skills can beat a great photographer with bad computer skills.

What's this, a troll? The writer is just plain wrong.

[Paul_B]

What's this, a troll? The writer is just plain wrong.

Most likely right.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=60559&page=1&pp=20

He's basicly telling you all your wasting your time learning photography. The other thread, everyone is wasting there money on digital slr photography.

His last one locked. Ignore, and they go away.


FYI, dropping into a forum full of fans of a particular peice of equipment for the sole purpose of bashing it will essentially allways garner a negative response.

There are two types of people that will do this sort of thing,.

Ones that are unaware of the implications of there post (we'll assume this includes you )

And those that are perfectly aware that they are starting a "flame war" and do it for that very reason. We call them "trolls".

[KennyG]

Put lipstick on a pig or troll and it is still a pig or troll.

[Jon, The Elder]

I think there are deep emotional problems at work here.

Mine or his - I'm not sure !

[Jerrytrebec33]

If you are a amazing photographer you can beat a bad one with amazing computer skills all the time.. If you take a crap photo theres only so much you can do..

[aam1234]

Aha, now it makes sense. It's like going to a car forum and ask "why drive a car, bicycles are better".

[Paul_B]

User is banned from forums

Surprised to see a further replies, why add wood to his fire. His posts sole purpose was to stir sh!t.

gonna pm a mod to lock this.