John Mee Photography

Switch to desktop Register Login

To Photoshop or not to Photoshop? Featured

Rate this item
(5 votes)

Quite often I am asked whether I "doctor" my images or use Photoshop. There is a general misconception among the public that all photography nowadays is "created" in Photoshop. Photography masters like Ansel Adams spent lots of time and effort manipulating images through various darkroom processes. Adams once said, "You don't take a photograph, you make it" Cameras are far from perfect for 

capturing the light, contrast and depth we perceive with our eyes. However, no amount of "doctoring" in Photoshop can ever fix bad composition, an out of focus image or create light where there was none. No amount of post processing can fix the nine rejects out of every ten photos that I shoot. Most photographers today do use some amount of digital processing to enhance or optimize their images. Because many photographers shoot in RAW (a file format that preserves every single detail captured by the camera) their images actually require processing before they can be viewed or printed.

What many people don't realise is that all cameras start with raw data and convert this data to JPG images with software inside the camera. They then throw away the raw data since it's no longer needed. So a certain amount of processing or "doctoring" occurs in all cameras.

I optimise my images in an attempt to convey what I saw and felt at the time of shooting a scene. If the colors or light were not present at that time, then it's impossible for me to add it afterwards. I employ various techniques including the use of various filters, long exposures and creativity to capture the image in camera.

At the end of the day, every image comes back to what you captured in your camera in the field, on the day. In fact, my process in the field is always more time consuming, complex and entertaining than it is in the digital darkroom. Throughout the entire history of photography, a photographers technique in the field had to be near perfect. And indeed, the same holds true today.

Last modified on Sunday, 01 July 2012 21:29

3 comments

  • Pedro Stephano

    I rarely *don't* use PS to process my shots, as I've found with experimenting that I can't get my camera to exactly correctly expose and get a decent histogram "in camera" hence I'm used to tweaking the light curves for most if not all of my shots.
    But therein is an agreement with you John - the experimenting and attempts to "get it right" are mostly done "in camera", whilst only tweaks are done in PS.
    I'd rather take ten different shots, and tweak them all a little then choose the best, than take one shot and tweak it a lot. I suppose I'm trying to say that I use PS as an assistant, but I'm doing the majority of the work.

    Pedro Stephano Saturday, 22 December 2012 22:55 Comment Link
  • Super User

    I'm cool with Photoshop. If the photo has "soul", then Ps could enhance it or destroy it. The end result is what matters - people either like it ... or not.

    Super User Wednesday, 15 February 2012 18:32 Comment Link
  • Greg

    There are however some people that rely too much on PS! I agree that RAW images need processing in the same way film does and the point and shoots are processed in camera. Good points well made. I still rely mainly on free stuff like picassa but was recently given Elements 9 which I need to learn how to use but had some fun with it to date!

    ps are you commenting on your own posts?!!!!

    Greg Wednesday, 15 February 2012 16:46 Comment Link
Login to post comments

© johnmeephotography.com 2012 | John Mee. All rights reserved.

Top Desktop version