Photography Lab THIS SPACE OPEN FOR ADVERTISEMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ADVERTISING HERE!
A place to display digital masterpieces, enhance photography skills, photoshop, and share photo tips with one another... |  |
06-29-2010, 10:56 PM
|
#1 | Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,311
Thanked 707 Times in 140 Posts
Failed 51 Times in 20 Posts
| Is Photoshop "Cheating"?
Please forgive the n00b question... just wondering what the concensus is on Photoshop manipulation of photos.
I'm a very inexperienced/amateur photographer working with pretty basic equipment (Nikon D5000 with Nikkor 18-55mm VR and Nikkor 55-200mm VR and super cheap filters).
I tend to be very disappointed with the original photos when I load them on my computer... specifically they tend to lack the "crispness" of most other semi-pro photographers and the colours are really faded/weak. I assume this is partly due to my ignorance and lack of skill, and partly an equipment (filters?) issue.
Anyway, I'm not much of a photographer but I've been working with Photoshop forever and I can usually manipulate the photo and turn something very bland/crap into a usable photo. Specifically, I most often adjust hue/saturation, contrast, and vibrance. Sometimes I'll also correct for over/underexposure too.
Am I "cheating" by doing this? Is there a certain limit to how much Photoshop manipulation one can do to a photo before it enters the realm of "quasi-photography, quasi-digital art"? (ie. HDR)
Here's an example of a pic... Original (re-sized, but otherwise no alterations or manipulations) After Photoshopping (re-sized, cropped, rotated, adjusted vibrance, adjusted hue/saturation, adjusted contrast)
"Cheating"? Thoughts?
|
| |
06-29-2010, 11:07 PM
|
#2 | I STILL don't get it
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Richmond
Posts: 463
Thanked 259 Times in 34 Posts
Failed 32 Times in 5 Posts
|
By definition, is putting on make-up considered cheating for you as well?
|
| |
06-29-2010, 11:20 PM
|
#3 | RS controls my life!
Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: van
Posts: 781
Thanked 324 Times in 104 Posts
Failed 220 Times in 54 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by 604Sparda By definition, is putting on make-up considered cheating for you as well? | LOLOLOL +1 thank god for make-up btw ..some girls would just be brutal without it
|
| |
06-29-2010, 11:35 PM
|
#4 | VLS Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,351
Thanked 2,591 Times in 832 Posts
Failed 61 Times in 19 Posts
|
Well, a lot of the modifications done in PS were done with film images in the darkroom, so no, it isn't cheating per se. Virtually all photographs since the first stable photographic print in 1826 has been modified in some way. I think the new content aware fill thing in CS5 is pushing it though. It also depends on what context image editing is used for, as in photojournalism all you are allowed to do is exposure, crop and rotation edits. You cannot add or subtract anything to in the image. For wedding, fashion, etc, then it's ok I guess, but I personally am a firm believer of getting it right in camera, and do as little photoshop work as possible. It also is more efficient to one's workflow.
__________________
2007 Volvo V50
Taken by ex: 2005 Toyota Prius.
R.I.P. 1997 Lexus ES300. 
R.I.P. 1989 Acura Legend Coupe LS.
|
| |
06-29-2010, 11:40 PM
|
#5 | Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,311
Thanked 707 Times in 140 Posts
Failed 51 Times in 20 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by 604Sparda By definition, is putting on make-up considered cheating for you as well? | Haha. Interesting analogy. I suppose make-up could be considered "cheating" if you were entering an "all-natural" beauty pageant...
Anyway, I didn't say I necessarily thought it was cheating. Just wanted to know what the consensus among photographers was. Quote:
Originally Posted by Senna4ever Well, a lot of the modifications done in PS were done with film images in the darkroom, so no, it isn't cheating per se. Virtually all photographs since the first stable photographic print in 1826 has been modified in some way. I think the new content aware fill thing in CS5 is pushing it though. It also depends on what context image editing is used for, as in photojournalism all you are allowed to do is exposure, crop and rotation edits. You cannot add or subtract anything to in the image. For wedding, fashion, etc, then it's ok I guess, but I personally am a firm believer of getting it right in camera, and do as little photoshop work as possible. It also is more efficient to one's workflow. | Good feedback, thanks. Your explanation makes perfect sense.
And yes, I have seen the new "content aware" tool and it's clearly pushing the boundaries of "cheating" since you are fundamentally altering the subject(s) of the photo. Obviously the degree to which you're using the tool would be a major factor. (Ie, removing a leaf on the ground vs. removing a person from a photo altogether).
I would love to be able to achieve the colour and exposure of the latter photo with the camera alone, but I wouldn't know where to start. Clearly I'll have to do more reading and upgrade my equipment before that becomes a reality.
|
| |
06-30-2010, 12:45 AM
|
#6 | VLS Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,351
Thanked 2,591 Times in 832 Posts
Failed 61 Times in 19 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaru I would love to be able to achieve the colour and exposure of the latter photo with the camera alone, but I wouldn't know where to start. Clearly I'll have to do more reading and upgrade my equipment before that becomes a reality. | You can! It's very simple - it's called "Velvia".
...but for digital photography, it will be your image editing skills that will decide whether of not you can achieve those results more so than your gear.
__________________
2007 Volvo V50
Taken by ex: 2005 Toyota Prius.
R.I.P. 1997 Lexus ES300. 
R.I.P. 1989 Acura Legend Coupe LS.
|
| |
06-30-2010, 12:58 AM
|
#7 | VLS Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,351
Thanked 2,591 Times in 832 Posts
Failed 61 Times in 19 Posts
|
Here are three zoom pan photos I did on three separate occaisions. One is a digitally manipulated image done in Photoshop using the radial blur filter, and the other two were done in camera with my film body, so the zoom pan was done by zooming the lens during the exposure. Is the digitally manipulated one cheating if it 'saves' an otherwise dull photo? Oh, and can you guess which photos are the film ones?
1)
2)
3)
__________________
2007 Volvo V50
Taken by ex: 2005 Toyota Prius.
R.I.P. 1997 Lexus ES300. 
R.I.P. 1989 Acura Legend Coupe LS.
|
| |
06-30-2010, 01:03 AM
|
#8 | Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,311
Thanked 707 Times in 140 Posts
Failed 51 Times in 20 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Senna4ever Is the digitally manipulated one cheating if it 'saves' an otherwise dull photo? | Yeah, that's basically what I was asking initially... Is it "cheating" to use Photoshop to save a photo that's complete shit (before any PS'ing)?
Nice pics. |
| |
06-30-2010, 01:07 AM
|
#9 | VLS Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,351
Thanked 2,591 Times in 832 Posts
Failed 61 Times in 19 Posts
|
It might come down to "who cares as long as no one knows?" but I guess it takes away from the authenticity of an image.
__________________
2007 Volvo V50
Taken by ex: 2005 Toyota Prius.
R.I.P. 1997 Lexus ES300. 
R.I.P. 1989 Acura Legend Coupe LS.
|
| |
06-30-2010, 09:26 AM
|
#10 | My dinner reheated before my turbo spooled
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,944
Thanked 13,521 Times in 1,745 Posts
Failed 2,239 Times in 545 Posts
|
you don't need to use PS, but you're just putting yourself behind everyone interms of "competition"... because everyone uses photoshop these days, and you can't take a perfect picture just from a straight shot 99% of the time, adjustments always help.
__________________ PHOTOGRAPHY / FLICKR |
| |
06-30-2010, 11:28 AM
|
#11 | RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001
Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Rmd, BC
Posts: 9,951
Thanked 378 Times in 66 Posts
Failed 11 Times in 7 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by 1exotic you don't need to use PS, but you're just putting yourself behind everyone interms of "competition"... because everyone uses photoshop these days, and you can't take a perfect picture just from a straight shot 99% of the time, adjustments always help. | Yes, but wouldn't it save you much processing time if you nail the shot right on the first time around? That for SURE gets you ahead of the "competition" not only did you get the shot, you saved yourself the time to post process as much as the "competition" did.
Time is money
__________________ All hail 2.3 turbo RIP: long live 1.6
-Former S.O.M.O. Vive la resistance!
-MFC Fan # 3
-RS ELITE NINJA smurf-ninja
-L.B.C.: REVscene's Resident Lowballers
-RS Photography Crew WpnOfChoice: Sony DSC-F717~"Dana" http://www.flickr.com/duckducksnap |
| |
06-30-2010, 11:39 AM
|
#12 | Rs has made me the woman i am today!
Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,032
Thanked 2,165 Times in 594 Posts
Failed 131 Times in 61 Posts
|
a camera lens will never be able to capture the beauty of the subject in a way the incredible human eye can, and it never will.
so manipulating the picture trying to bring it close to reality as possible is not cheating, it's the opposite, what you're doing is trying to make the picture more real.
__________________ (oO:::\___/:::Oo) (DPE-wheels) // Satin Cocaine White |
| |
06-30-2010, 11:46 AM
|
#13 | I'll be good I promise.
Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Korea
Posts: 1,936
Thanked 1,551 Times in 329 Posts
Failed 349 Times in 138 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by G-spec a camera lens will never be able to capture the beauty of the subject in a way the incredible human eye can, and it never will.
so manipulating the picture trying to bring it close to reality as possible is not cheating, it's the opposite, what you're doing is trying to make the picture more real. | +1
I considered photoshop is a way to express your imagination, perspective.
|
| |
06-30-2010, 10:35 PM
|
#14 | I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Shanghai
Posts: 3,564
Thanked 893 Times in 352 Posts
Failed 356 Times in 87 Posts
|
photoshop would be cheating if you consider proof reading is cheating when you write an essay.
__________________ yolo |
| |
06-30-2010, 11:16 PM
|
#15 | RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Trenton, ON
Posts: 4,818
Thanked 131 Times in 52 Posts
Failed 10 Times in 5 Posts
|
I had this same conversation with an uncle of mine, and I still can't get the point across to him. Digital sensors can't capture the same colour and quality as a film camera.
Using photoshop to make adjustments allows one to match or re-create the same affect.
Another way of looking at it is that your camera has built in presets. Instead of having your camera apply the presets automatically, you apply those adjustment settings after the image is taken. Thus allowing to have more control over the image.
The only time that I believe that your cheating is in model/fashion. When they start taking weight and other imperfections of a body out.
Also IMO the most basic adjustments that necessary to any image would be the adjustments found in Lightroom/Aperture.
|
| |  |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:37 AM. |