Has post-processing killed the art of photography?

Does anyone else ever get the feeling that image processing applications have sort of taken the art out of photography? I know that pretty much any photo you see anywhere has had some PP done to it, but when does it stop? Photography is an art. People have been taking absolutely stunning photographs for years and years before computers came into the picture. What happened?

I guess what I'm saying is this. You can learn how to use LightRoom or Photoshop. But the art of photography is only enhanced by PP. Contrary to what my Myth Busters determined, you can't polish a terd.

Just my thoughts. Let the flaming begin.

I'd rather think of it as an extented way of creating you pictures or art if you will...

If you get flamed for anything, it should be for posting yet another thread on a topic that gets beaten into the ground on a weekly basis.

As for taking great pictures before computers, you apparently have little idea of how much work was done in chemical darkrooms. Just take a look at http://www1.umn.edu …mages/fading-away1858.jpg from the year 1858 and includes 5 different negatives to create the final product.

No flaming here!
Its all individual. Some like heavy handed editing, othesr don't do a thing.
Some like adding painting effects, others add light and contrast.

I like that its subjective to what the photographer sees and wants to relay to the viewer.
That being said, I do think that way too many folks depend on editing to fix all their photos, as opposed to learning the technique to take a good photo.
I love taking photos, I am not one to sit and do an hour in editing to make it "pop"

Before Photoshop and Lightroom, there was the darkroom. It's not like PP is a new concept or anything.

Old debate. Aside from the simple adjustments (contrast, levels, curves, etc.) for every photo that has been improved by aggressive photoshopping there are probably a dozen that have been abused in the name of art.

No amount of post processing can replace the good eye of a photographer. It can't replace the timing, choosing of the right angle, the ability to recognize a strong composition, or compensate for the determination it takes to seek great moments and capture them.
Post processing is simply an extension of the computer that is your camera. It is just another tool, that when used properly, can help a photographer to realize his or her vision.

i once heard a cave man telling Picasso he butchered fine art!

but that was before i started to HDR some Ansel Adams images to improve them!

It's ruined it like sound mixing has ruined music. Oh, wait....

Some people take PP too far. No doubt about that. But most people can also recognize terrible PP. So its not like those over processed photos are getting any real recognition.

jonny5000 wrote in post #12025240
Does anyone else ever get the feeling that image processing applications have sort of taken the art out of photography?

No.

Photography as an art is unlimited in scope. If one does not like a particular type of photography, oh well, next.

Look at all of the different types of "painting" arts forms out there. I am sure there are some who do not like a type different than the way they have expresssed themselves.


Some people need to get over this "ooooh, photography has really changed..." So, has a lot of other things in life. There is no one telling you not to perform the type of photography you like, you should not stop someone from performing photography the way they choose


Art is Art in any form.

Flo wrote in post #12025271
That being said, I do think that way too many folks depend on editing to fix all their photos, as opposed to learning the technique to take a good photo.

I think Flo said it way better than I did. Of course, this is just my opinion. I'm a software engineer, if anyone knows how computer applications have drastically improved just about everything we do, it's me. I'm also a musician so I know the benefit of modern sound equipment. But you can't beat the warmth that can only come from 2" tape.

Honestly, I used to think that photoshop ruined photography with all those different effects. I then realized photography can be a canvas for people with a more artistic background. They can essentially draw on their photography to make it a photo art piece.

Now with that being said, I don't use Photoshop but I do use light room for it's basic functions. It's just not my style to overly PP my images. I like to try and recreate what I saw with my eyes.

Everyone has their styles and honestly it's like saying landscape photography is correct and abstract photography isn't. In the end, it's all about how you feel with your finished product.

AArrrggggggg make these threads go away !!!