Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Question for the board, and I didn’t want to make it a poll: does it matter if a picture is enhanced by Photoshop or any one of the photo applications? Is current technology just another tool in an artist’s palette or is it a crutch for lack of talent? I have an AA in art, ok whoopee doopy, but in my photography class, we were taught that it might take hours just to get that perfect shot of the sunset. Maybe days. Well with PS, you can get that “perfect” picture with just hitting the right tab in the app (ok not quite that easy but you get what I mean) . Is that really any different though then going into a darkroom and exposing your negative a bit longer to make up for bad exposure?
Here is a pic of Sting (yes when he had hair lol 1982). How this was done was with Kodalith film. That film has no gray scale. It is essentially only black and white. Well what I did, was get two negatives of the same picture, and offset them, causing just the outline of the picture to be developed. It must have taken me a couple of days to get that picture right, and now I can do it in a couple of hours, probably better
Here is a picture of some tulips. As you can see it has been photo shopped to the max, but I like the picture anyway.
We have also seen on this board and all over the net, pictures that could never really be. Bush riding a mule with bags of coke on his saddle. Does that make them manufactured works of art or just an aberration of real life? So just a thought and I was wondering what you thought about art vs. talent vs. technology vs. ?? cr****
Post by oleander124 on May 9, 2007 17:50:52 GMT -5
I work in design, and I use Photoshop every day. I think there has to be some underlying talent for someone to get their desired results using any software. You can't simply just hit a button and "voila!" ART! You have to know what you're doing. I think Photoshop is just a way to get what you want out of it faster and easier.
Besides, we have sales people in our company that think they are artists and design their own ads, but they are usually pure crap...they seem to think that just because they can use the software it means they are artists, but they are not!
I've thought about this too Ron, and I definitely feel they're a valid tool (...'course that view could spring from my lack of talent. ha! ). I think creative people have visions and use whatever media they're familiar with to try to make that vision come to life.
Your picture of Sting (fabulous by the way!) - the darkroom techniques used are an art in themselves, but an art (in my mind) detached from the final image...You had a vision of how you wanted the final image to appear and you worked until you succeeded in creating it. It took two days, but I'd be willing to bet that if there was a way in 1982 for you to have done it in two hours you would have used that technique instead. I don't feel this should detract in any way from the art that's produced. The realization of the vision is the key.
Photoshop cannot entirely replace a quality photo. Garbage in, garbage out as they say. Photoshop can only fix a bad photo so much, and even then it's all dependent on the user's skill and talent and eye.
Photoshop is essential for a photographer, if only to enhance your excellent photo-taking abilities.
I'm a graphic designer for a weekly paper. Or layout artist, or whatever you want to call it. This week, A reporter for my paper took it upon himself to make a "photo collage" of the crappy pictures he took with his camera, to run on the front page. I let it go, didn't have the energy to argue this, and just credited the collage to him out of a desire to not have that horrendous image tied to my name. Now this guy ticked me off because 1. he wasted an hour of his own time as a reporter doing this; 2. he's been told to just send the things to me and I can make the design decisions; and 3. I busted my ass to get this paper at least somewhat polished in the last year only to have a jr-high level collage muck it up.
The bad thing about certain aspects of commercial art is the general idea that people have that they can do it if they have the tools. Which is about as ludicrous as me saying I could have pulled off your Sting picture with my 35mm.
It's not the tools that make the art, it's the person and the mind behind that individual that sees it and brings it out.
So in a roundabout way I make my point. It's just some tools that are now accessable that make people think they can do it too.
Not that I'm against people experimenting with new tools for their own exploration. But realize with most things, artists do work very hard for their masterpieces and we are not "playing around" or "working magic" or "making it look easy." it isn't easy. in terms of commercial art, especially, you get what you pay for, so don' t have your best friends 12 year old niece make that next website for your law firm using MS front page.
I'm just really tired of people thinking that being a graphic designer is easy. I get wierd comments even from others in an art field, that think anyone can do it, any designer can do any type of design work, and basically for free if you want the work bad enough.
So sorry for my kinda sideways rant. It was a rough week for me.
I do warn against frivolous photoshop filtering though. If I know what filter you used for an image, or if it doesn't add anything to the image, then leave it out, try something else. No need for saran wrap on tulips. That looks like it was a gorgeous picture without the filter, so a lot of art is just knowing when to leave well enough be, whether it's graphics, photography, ceramics or sketching. The hard part is knowing when to stop effing with it.
and kudos to you on that Sting pic. I am a horrible photographer.
We treat mishaps like sinking ships and I know that I don't want to be out to drift Well I can see it in your eyes like I taste your lips and They both tell me that we're better than this
Post by hippiehippieshake on May 9, 2007 20:46:27 GMT -5
it depends whether you're going for "artistic" or realistic. if you want to capture memories the way they happened (and i don't even think photography's very good for this... in fact, i think it tends to skew memory quite a deal), then photoshopping past the point of reducing lens flare or equalizing exposure is definitely a cop-out, though i don't think it necessarily is a "crutch for lacking talent" like you say; more like a crutch for a less than great digital camera.
on the other hand, "artistic" photography and the use of photoshop to create a mood or get a feel that wasn't previously present in the pic (like the tulip one you posted) can be more about concept or viewer perception than the actual "memory" of tulips it's capturing. same with the sketchy sting thing you posted.
i'll definitely be shooting a bunch of pics at roo... macro zoom on a digital camera works pretty much as well as binoculars... plus you can capture the image, and no one'll ask to borrow em
i'm going where the sun keeps shining, thru' the pouring rain, going where the weather suits my clothes. backing off of the north east wind, sailing on summer breeze, and skipping over the ocean like a stone.
Post by blazeaway54 on May 10, 2007 2:24:34 GMT -5
I think that electronic art is certainly a new field, and Photoshop is one of its mediums or tools, but I don't think the line between that and traditional photography should be blurred. If, for example, I was buying photographic art, I would want to know if it had been digitally altered. For your own purposes, who cares, it's up to you, but in terms of art, I think it's important to make the distinction.
tnx for all the insightfull comments ... i agree with like 85% of what was said ... and i am going to take a bunch of pics at the roo too .. cant wait ... cr****
That looks like it was a gorgeous picture without the filter, so a lot of art is just knowing when to leave well enough be, whether it's graphics, photography, ceramics or sketching. The hard part is knowing when to stop effing with it.
