I don’t rant much here. But, it’s my blog, and I’ll rant if I want to. 🙂
I just recently read something on Facebook that struck a raw nerve. It was titled “The best 100 photographs ever taken without Photoshop.” NEWS FLASH: You don’t “take” photos with Photoshop. For most of us, Photoshop is nothing more than a post-processing development tool for our images. And by “Photoshop,” most of these inane commentaries really mean post-processing software (so, Lightroom, PhaseOne, OnOne, Nik, “The GIMP” and others, you are all in the same basket). When I say “Photoshop” in this article, lets agree that I mean post-processing software.
NEWS FLASH: You Don’t take photos with Photoshop
The silly title of this Facebook post is like saying, back in the days of film, “the 100 best prints made without a darkroom.”
There isn’t any doubt that post-processing software can be used in an abusive way – as could the old wet darkroom. But am I the only one that is tired of the shrill howls of the would-be “purists” who cry foul any time anyone uses Photoshop to in any way change the image that came straight out of the camera? Did we pass a law in the U.S. that forbids changing or “working” images out of the camera? And is there some new moral “standard” (set, of course, by the shrill criers) for what is “natural?”
Photoshop is not some evil software that has overtaken the photographic world and destroyed all good photography. C’mon, folks. Lighten up. My imagery (even my nature imagery) is predominantly artistic. I have yet to shoot new footage, evidence photography or something purporting to be an exact replication of what “was.” And, I submit, even those endeavors are probably less “accurate” than supposed.
No matter what we do, there are factors in photography that distort reality
And it is a matter of digital “science” that in most cases, the images render by the in-camera computer needs at least some post processing to make an image presentable. And that processing can be done without altering the so-called integrity of the image. But what if I go further with my artistic image? Why is there so much angst about this from so many people?
I’ll trust the viewer to make her own conclusions about believability
No matter what we do, there are factors in photography that distort reality. At a bare minimum, perspective and lens focal length are significant factors. But unless I am submitting my photograph as evidence in the courtroom, or as support of a news article, who really cares? If a shot is “believable,” it is worthy. And I’ll trust the viewer to make her own conclusions about believability.