Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>>My point is, someone can completely manufacture an image in the darkroom >>and it's OK. But run it through Photoshop, and it's a crime. Yes, very true. However, Photoshop is most often used by incompetent photographers who feel digital is the be all end all solution to photography. Why worry about correct exposure when you can fix it in Photoshop. The software is good at fixing problems people are too damn stupid to correct in the camera and I hate it. It is though one can't possibly make a good image unless it goes through some digital manipulation. So when I hear people praising Photoshop, I have to laugh. The mark of a good photographer is not how he uses some bloody computer, but in how good his negatives are. Start with that and then manipulate if you must. But do not equate good photography with Photoshop. Use it only when needed and not to correct every GD image. You should be doing that in the camera. If you can't make good negatives then you are not a very good photographer. Period! There is very little I can't do photographically, with film and a good camera. If I do need to improve or correct the image, I do it with changes in developers I might use for the film and dodging and burning during printing. I can't think of anything Photoshop can do for me. I start with extremely good negatives and work from there. Photoshop users tend to start with any old negative or slide and then add change and manipulate the hell out of it, calling it good. Computers can take most crap and change it. As far as what is and is not art, it is too bad every Nutball idea that comes from the minds of equally Nutball photographers is considered art. BS. First of all, crap is crap and art can't be defined anyway. My idea of crap and art differs from yours, and the other persons. As far as the person knowing Ansel Adams, and thinking his so called Straight Work not being a pretty sight, I disagree. The stuff most of us see is not everything he did, and he made some wonderful unmanipulated images. I wonder just how well you knew him. Although not a pal, I did sort of know him as well. I have some prints of his and they were not changed. Actually, he spent some time in the darkroom I was employed at when he started promoting and working with Polaroid and came to my town. I watched him make a few prints, standing next to him in our darkroom. So, all of you, take some time and learn how to print. do not rely on Photoshop, it is not going to make you a better photographer. Learn to make good negatives in the first place. Rant is officially over. RM