Delicate post topic. Personally I think Photoshop is just part of modern day photography. I don't belong to Viewbug so can't comment on that. But if people are winning there and you believe it's because they are Photoshop/editing their photos. There is nothing wrong with that, they are using available resources. You have the choice to embrace the tools of the trade. Think back to the first camera tripod that was invented. You have two photographers side by side taking a photo of the sunset. One photographer has a tripod and other photographer believes using a tripod is cheating. Photographs are taken, photographer with tripod has a sharp photo, the other photographer with no tripod has good photo, but soft. No one cheated here, just using what available tools to make a better shot. The person viewing the photo doesn't care how the photographer took the photo or if they used a tripod or not. They only care how the shot looks.
Canon EOS 5D Mark II, 17-40mmL, 24-105mmL, 100-400mmL, 300mm f/4L IS, Sigma 12-24mm, 430EX, Extension tubes
which is a NULL page. So you're on VB but no one can see your images without friending you?
I can't see anything of yours, and I would like to. And as i said above, you can't "lift" anything from VB to show here, you can only use links to pages on that site.
If you'd like to discuss an image, watermark it and post it here, please.
I don't mean to burst your bubble, but an awful lot of the members of VB like/favorite/award images simply to acquire points and climb up to higher levels. I'd keep a grain of salt handy because I'm pretty sure it has very little to do with the quality of images for many folks. Given most of the images submitted to the contests, it's apparent most of those folks have no clue what constitutes a decent photograph.
Nice analogy about early photography but not accurate but I see your point. I'll still never agree to it simply because I can take good photos but t hen be lousy at photoshop.
Tom-Lutz wrote: I've got it water marked but have no clue how to send the post here. I disagree about photos sucking just because they haven't been photo shopped.
I think he means higher end photography. It's all been touched by editing hands.
As far as uploading a photo, just click on the Insert Image icon next to the red Play button.
[/url]
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
If you are such a purist, in film days, which film did you use?
Did you ever experiment with vivid colour fim?
Film for landscape?
Film for portrait?
Cross processing?
Developed your own black & white?
If you only did eg Kodak Ectachrome, did you ever have them printed?
On what contrast paper? Did you tell them not to dodge or burn?
When you scan your film in, what equipment do you use?
Did you try them all to see which one gives you colours and contrast closet to the film?
Just trying to make you aware that being a purest takes a lot of effort.
Ruby Grace wrote: Delicate post topic. Personally I think Photoshop is just part of modern day photography. I don't belong to Viewbug so can't comment on that. But if people are winning there and you believe it's because they are Photoshop/editing their photos. There is nothing wrong with that, they are using available resources. You have the choice to embrace the tools of the trade. Think back to the first camera tripod that was invented. You have two photographers side by side taking a photo of the sunset. One photographer has a tripod and other photographer believes using a tripod is cheating. Photographs are taken, photographer with tripod has a sharp photo, the other photographer with no tripod has good photo, but soft. No one cheated here, just using what available tools to make a better shot. The person viewing the photo doesn't care how the photographer took the photo or if they used a tripod or not. They only care how the shot looks.
Well said
Also, there is the matter of degree of adjustment. "Cheating" with PS sounds like making drastic adjustments. It does not have to be that way. With Lightroom I can make mild adjustments, that in essence "fix" the poor adjustments that the camera might make with a JPG image. And yes, the camera does make those adjustments in a JPG. And yes, those JPG adjustments the camera makes are not always correct, much less optimum. There is no "natural" or "true" image, no matter how advanced the camera is. Hard for beginners to believe, but that is the way cameras and photography are.
Tom-Lutz wrote: Nice analogy about early photography but not accurate but I see your point. I'll still never agree to it simply because I can take good photos but t hen be lousy at photoshop.
You mean historically accurate? Analogies rarely are.
Ruby Grace wrote: Delicate post topic. Personally I think Photoshop is just part of modern day photography. I don't belong to Viewbug so can't comment on that. But if people are winning there and you believe it's because they are Photoshop/editing their photos. There is nothing wrong with that, they are using available resources. You have the choice to embrace the tools of the trade. Think back to the first camera tripod that was invented. You have two photographers side by side taking a photo of the sunset. One photographer has a tripod and other photographer believes using a tripod is cheating. Photographs are taken, photographer with tripod has a sharp photo, the other photographer with no tripod has good photo, but soft. No one cheated here, just using what available tools to make a better shot. The person viewing the photo doesn't care how the photographer took the photo or if they used a tripod or not. They only care how the shot looks.
good post Ruby
Canon 5D Mark II | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM | Canon 35L | Sigma 85 1.4 | Helios 44M-6 58mm(M42) | Zeiss 50mm 1.4 (C/Y) | Canon 135L | (2) 430EX II
Tom-Lutz wrote: Nice analogy about early photography but not accurate but I see your point. I'll still never agree to it simply because I can take good photos but t hen be lousy at photoshop.
Right. That's why I posited "most". And certainly, preference has a large part to play here.
The sony a7s might be seven years old, but the camera's specs, features, design, and price make it a worthy option for shooting photos (and video!) in 2021.
The Canon EOS 7D is well over a decade old, but if you're a beginner photographer looking for a first camera or even an enthusiast that needs a second body, the 7D might be a good fit.
Are used cameras worth it? Though there are some risks, there are many more benefits of buying used cameras. Learn why you should shop used in this guide!
Blue hour vs golden hour - which is better for landscapes? It's not so much a case of which is better, but how to use their unique features to create a beautiful shot.
The sony a7s might be seven years old, but the camera's specs, features, design, and price make it a worthy option for shooting photos (and video!) in 2021.
Not sure how to use a light meter? With this guide, you'll learn all about different kinds of light meters and how to use them to create improved images.
By using the real estate photography technologies outlined in this article, you'll have the firepower you need to create beautiful images and videos of properties.
Displaying your photos in physical form is a great way to get potential clients interested in your work. Learn how to create a gallery display of your images in this quick guide.
The Canon EOS 7D is well over a decade old, but if you're a beginner photographer looking for a first camera or even an enthusiast that needs a second body, the 7D might be a good fit.
IFINYU97 1 post
VAMBO 1 post
Stanly 1 post
Kenta 1 post
Photo Amigo 1 post
