Has the Skill been taken out of photograpy?

groundhog

Life Survivor
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
10,133
[:)] Has the skill been taken out of photography by Digital Cameras and Photoshop type computer software?
After joining a local camera club last year, I came to the conclusion that it is not so much the skill with the camera and lenses,but more the skill with the PC and Photo editing software,with All the competitions that were run , internal, and inter club/ regional, there were very few good Natural pictures or images,by that I mean good picture's/images that had been taken with the camera and NOT Manipulated or edited with photo editing software.
What do you think??
 

jabtas

Regular member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
117
How far do you class as 'manipulated', cos if you shoot in RAW all images have to me converted on a computer and such are you classing them as being 'manipulated'
 

davidsenior

15/03/03 - 22/06/16
In Memoriam
Joined
Mar 15, 2003
Messages
11,301
I dont think the "skill" has been taken out by going digital.
The EXPENSE at darkroom level, film and chemical costs have been removed.[:D]

I always used to play around/manipulate my B&W shots in the darkroom, but whereas then I could spend a whole evebning in the darkroom and come out with perhaps ONE 10 x 8 print, I can now download to the computer and the software can sort it and have it printed (all with the light on) within minutes if need be.
No waste, no water, no chemicals....voila!![:D]


However,....the print has to be taken in the first instance with a particular view/shot in mind and either framed correctly at the time OR...cropped and manipulated later, same goes with either digital or film.
 

banksy

Life Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 8, 2003
Messages
12,898
Yep, I used to spend hours in a darkroom, dodging with my underexposed bits, drunk from the fix fumes.
To get the perfect print.
Then seeing that bloody dust spot in the middle.
[xx(]

As Cleggy says, seeing and composing a picture is half the battle.

When I first went digital, I was snapping everything many times, because it was free, (compared to film), and surely, there'd be one in there which was a masterpiece ?
But the quality of my pics did go down.
 
Last edited:

Shez

Regular member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
1,893
I think to a certain extent it has yes, if you're improving the colours, contrast, etc then I think you're within the limits, if you're cutting bits of pics & pasteing other bits in then I think you've over-stepped the line. As some have said you can't really improve a rubbish picture but sometimes the post PS'd pics look nothing like the original.
 

H T B

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
3,168
Digital photography has opened up the world of photography to the masses that, in the past, have wanted to be able too but found it too expensive and time consuming.
Also, how many times, when the developed photos have come back have you thought, if only i could.....
 

groundhog

Life Survivor
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
10,133
[:)] That is true HTB,but as geofflukins said "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear",
I found with joining a local camera club,that a lot of the "photographs/ Images" were not produced by the camera Alone, but the majority were in fact done by manipulation with computer editing software, hence my question have digital camera's and computer software taken the skill out of taking a really good photograph? ,as opposed from someone naturally taking a really good photograph like with an old film camera,whereby you had to set the camera up manually check light and exposure etc,and the picture you got was what you got, i.e if it was a really good photograph, it was down entirely to the photographers skill with the camera.
 

jabtas

Regular member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
117
You still need an eye to spot the potential of the shot or the right angle etc, regardless of digital or film

If you have time, have a little look the my online gallery, I must admit, I do very little to my images
www.pbase.com/jabtas
I do shoot exclusively in RAW format so they do need converting and addition of sharpening and contrast boosting, but that is the very nature of RAW files, but they do ultimately retain more detail that an in camera jpg image and produce a far better final image
 

carpmon43

Regular member
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
937
would yoube suprised to here the top guys used the top dark rooms guys because they got 'better' photo's... yes they were meddledwith with better chemicals etc.

your auot;s arnt quite the best eexposures, ok they look pritty good, particularly om the compacts, but, when you see a proper exsposure you'll see what i mean.

the after effects on a pc arnt as easy as the adverts show, ok tidle the levals just slide up this and that but again, when you actualy see a good after effect, you'll be looking at 6 month or more before you see what i'm, on about.

all the compoinents that make up an image, including the psycology, are still there,, again auto focus on full auto is actualy sh!te compaired to a properly composed image..

take the canon or nilon top of the range cams, theyre 1.3x crop factor...and NOT actualy 'full frame'. this basically means the aspect of size to phot physical size can never quite equol the old cameras, once again unless your were learned and well exsperienced in the old cameras you'd not know that either..the list goes on.

end of the day your getting them in focus basically and esclaiming woooo hows that for a good image! if you did know you'd sat hmm yeh nice focus.

basically the digital stuff lacks the dynamic lighting range, the processing is just an exstension of what you can get wih the digital. its correcting a poo bit of kit basically.

next..you buy a dslr, it has 100 200 400 800 etc to choose from, the pic an apature and its gives you the auto shutter speed or vice verser...its more than adequate as 'in focous shot' but unless you actualy know the idial lighting, the ideal settings including iso you cant even get close to a perfic pic even after a load of phottoshop on top of it.

end of the day the average person dunt know a good un from a bad un amd honestly beleive it only matters what they like..bit selfish like and totaly newbie. my favourate ever fraise that comes up ohhhh so often is ''i cant his face!!'' that was said at what i could only discribe as a peice of art in forograghy, but all the old boy wanted was to see the kids face..any snap shop on any fone would have dun him.. du dahhh...

next is, i know! stick a BREST on it..it'll sell, see their moof and its dirty or a porno...yawn, total ignorence basicaly.
heres the real kicker, the corps are selling the newbies and the pleasently ignorent a little false eago feed, nothing more nothing less
yet, theyre all the first to shpout any one or anything down that even dares tell them the truth.

so why bother?

personal acheavement maybe? ooooooo shudders we cant have that now can we lol.

80 percent of the debates about the camera kit is by nonowners or non profesionals and as such a mere apinion about some ones personal world bubble. its hot air.

auto's.. without a 500 quid meter and 5 year exsperience you wouldnt know waht iso range you were in.

heres the prosess, switch off auto and lets do it proper, so an apature is selected to get a nice moody narrow infocus up close shot, theyre moving so they stick a shutter speen and hey presto some image comes out, a quick photoshop tp correct it and oooo looks ace dunnit?
it does untill a camera was used correcly, then its erghhhh have you seen what we used to think looked good..

when your face to face with a gob shu-ite in any subject its anoying isnt it, especialy when they start the speil of bull and side tracking to sound like they know lol..

bandying to ..consumer damnd, that is controlled by the seller and backed up a 100 persent by the fish biting on the worms they offer... verses actualy knowing learning or finding out.


the day is..pc programs, the truth is it is better in a lot ways, but..its no where near in other ways.
and making a lotta money to. auto focus is ok to a point, then you have to go to manual, like wise with the setting, the camera 'hole' changes the focus depth, how good it looks and the effect, where you put it depends on an idia or an image from your mind the goes right through to the end product, that now includes options on your pc..then you take it..and hopefully end up with what you though.

same as it always was has and will be no matter what the medium is..a cave wall, a canvas, a wall a camera, sinny cam a pc image..pen pencil laser fiahing rod car lollol..yeh thats right 'your art, your knack your skill'...

or click auto ooo it in focus dead good i am i am dead good hey you im dead good i am i am im dead good...yawn.

stick the flash on an dooooo it all in focus...yawn lol.(now move that flash about, auto or camera syncs just make easier to acheive a basic better standard, when you can use it the art of flash then begins..).

go on, can you correctly size an image to fit a screen in a different resolusion in a different color system? or determin at what size you can print it? the whole dark room stuff on a pc, hoe easy is that? yeh go do it lol sudenly it is when you can do it,, and a night mare of red herrings when you cant wher as before you ent the film off and they did all for you.
 

Fishing_Widow

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
12
I think that you can have the best camera in the world, but if you don't have skills and knowledge in composition then you're never going to take a great photo.

I think digital processing has made it easier to make a good photo better, but I think you still need someone behind the camera who pushes it from good to great.
 

davidsenior

15/03/03 - 22/06/16
In Memoriam
Joined
Mar 15, 2003
Messages
11,301
Carpmon, what the heck are you ranting on about in your post above ??


I sincerely hope you take more care in framing and taking a decent photograph, than you did in that drivel you've just thrown together.

Whatever happened to a "spellchecker"....or for that matter just simply read through "wat you have rit" before hitting the post it button.
 

Geoff P

The MOGerator
Staff member
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 2, 2001
Messages
15,841
Well said Dave. I just read the first paragraph and gave up. There might have been some good points in that post but if you cannot read it, it is a waste of time.

I have got photoshop elements 10, I also shoot in RAW but I do not believe in adjusting the photos I take to make them "look better" apart from cropping.
 

Neil ofthe nene

Doing things differently.
Site Supporter
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
22,333
Surely its the end result that counts. Taking the picture is the start of the process. Photos have always been enhanced during the developing and printing process, with digital and a PC you can just do more or more quickly.

Even great master artists touched their pictures up or changed composition halfway through. Why should photography be any different?
 

carpmon43

Regular member
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
937
awww shuks...

takeing care to get in focus and 'square'...stage 1 mate lol. thems nice 'record shots'.

to get the extraness.. its all that dribble n then some i'm afraid.

the simple act of auto...yeh its focus lol. (thats all though).

you'll see as you get there .



[:T]
 

carpmon43

Regular member
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
937
triple post...going for a record lol..

neil, yes your right, but the better the starting point the better the end game..basicaly.
 

carpmon43

Regular member
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
937
post 4..oops..

dave as your sig says..i wear a cat flap lol... i used the spell checkers plural, for colege etc and ermmm, if its more than a few words its actualy better haveing the typos and mispellings in..because, they change stuff, if you cant see it to correct it (for a second time) its too late, the peace then reads something totally different in places.

for the colege stuff i lost 3 marks for spelling verses some 'corrected' sentances that lost me 1/4 the asignment.. i no like spell checkers.

disleptics rule ok...
 

davidsenior

15/03/03 - 22/06/16
In Memoriam
Joined
Mar 15, 2003
Messages
11,301
Neil of the nene wrote;
Even great master artists touched their pictures up or changed composition halfway through

Can you name some ??


The great Ansell Adams used to take AGES walking about with a light meter, mainly around Yosemite National Park, before he averaged out what aperture and shutter speed he NEEDED (not wanted) LOL.

Take a look at some of his work and amaze yourself that these shots were taken.....so long ago, and yet are so bloody good.[:D][:D]

He has definite Black, White and just about every shade inbetween all in perfect exposure and focus.[:D]




groundhog,.............it's all your fault, you posted this and woke up carpmon43.[:(]
 
Top