People that shoot for magazines tend to have cameras worth more than a couple thousand, not including good quality glass, digital backs are expensive.
The only reason those photographs are editted is because the magazine publishers want them to be, because they'll get more sales that way, people don't want to see "ugly", and if that means airbrushing a photograph then that's what happens. You do realise however that you can do a lot of that with just lighting and good technique?



Depends, there's a boundary that's easily crossed. You can edit a few things, sure, but if you edit a lot, it's no longer a photograph, it's a photo manipulation.
There's a difference between merely enhancing a photograph and manipulating it.




Your comparison isn't correct, the correct comparison would be between shoes and art as a whole, with different types of shoes being compared to different types of art.

Photography is a different art to photo mannipulation, and while they have some similarities, they're also quite different.

its ok if you dont accept it but its happening.

I don't think you understand the difference between photographic retouching and photo manipulation.

i do.

maybe youre the one thats not understanding.

and even though im not that well educated on photography itself.
i still have a clear mind about it,
i think so people get so far stuck in it they forget why they love photography in the first place or what its really about.

Sigh, there's no point trying to turn my own words back on me.



What it's really about is creating fantastic images, not creating mediocre ones and spending hours trying to correct it.

The term "polishing a turd" applies very well here.

What about creating great images and making them fantastic with help of another medium such as photoshop? I think this would be what most people use it for (atleast me).

in your own opinion.

you come off as one of those people who think theyre perfect in every way and follow a thin line and do everything the way you think its suppose to be done.
well youre wrong, and i hate people that are like that because they can never broaden their imagination because theyre always suppressing it with their own egotistic ideas.

no because thats mediocre and takes hours.
and isnt real photography.

You could be doing that when you take the photo by careful composition and by using good equipment at the right settings.



How exactly am I wrong? If I had no imagination what the fuck would I be doing on an arts based course?
There are right and wrong ways to do things, you want to correct the perspective of a photo, do it with the proper lens, not photoshop. You want to have a black and white image, shoot black and white, you want high contrast, shoot high contrast film, you want high colour saturation, use high saturation film, etc.



What's real photography? You think the masters of photography just shot mediocre shots and enhanced them? Of course they didn't.

This post was edited by Veilside on May 27 2009 11:26am