Digital BW, The Print

Monday, September 16, 2002, 3:25:32 PM, Tim Atherton wrote:


TA> Fist, photography always has and always will be about artificiality and 
TA> manipulation (it's two dimensional for goodness sake - how real and 
TA> true is that...?).

TA> Secondly - it takes just as much skill, expertise and experience to use 
TA> Photoshop well as a photographic tool as it does be an excellent 
TA> darkroom technician. Differnet skills, but just as rare in both cases.


I completely agree with you.  And those who use it artistically garner
my respect.  Those who use it in place of, or to make up for, lack of
artistic talent, no.

I'm sorry, you can all call me a Luddite (which I'm not I use PS
extensively, have read 4 books on it and have taken 3 workshops in
using it for photography), but those who want to blindly and broadly
classify ANY all-out use of PS for whatever reason as perfectly
acceptable I find are usually the ones who depend on it the most. What
did photographers ever do before PS came along? Just toss out all
those awful slides on the light table?

I use it constantly. Do I crank up the saturation to make up for my
poor exposure or lack of good light at the scene? No. Do I change
color hues to be more interesting and completely different than what
was actually there? No. I'm a photographer, not a graphic artist.

(And by saying this I AM NOT saying that PS should not be used!  So do not
accuse me of such.)

Anyone want to maturely and intelligently continue the thread fine,
but let's drop the condescending and belittling "oh for heaven sakes!"
comments.  Please.

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...