Good Photography vs. Good Photo Editing

[zooathome]

I have been studying photography on my own for several months. I just got my DSLR for Christmas (kind of like learning how to drive a car from a book, without a car to drive). Prior to that I had a simple P&S.

How much of photography is in the art of the initial photograph, subject, scene, etc. and how much of it is in the photo editing?

I am not experienced at photo editing beyond the basics and I worry that without those skills (which I do intend to learn, just don't have them now) I will struggle in this field.

I would love thoughts on the level of importance of great photo taking vs. great photo editing.

[hollis]

To capture a scene, I think there are several steps involved.

1. You have to "See" the picture in your mind
a lot of people look at a pretty sunset and go "ah!"
its another thing to look at a scene and go...
"thats the shot I want, I'll need my tripod, wide angle lens, & ND filter.
I need to get very low and shoot at this angle"

2. You have to capture that image with your camera
back to the sunset, lots of people grab their cameras & snap away.
but when the pics come out, they are dull & boring.
Chances are the "Auto" camera setting didnt capture the scene
like you saw it. You have to know your camera.

3. Photoshop
This can be an Art just like making a Fine Print
Half of what made Ansel Adams great was what he did in the darkroom.

So to me, a good photo is when all 3 of these elements mesh well.

[zooathome]

To capture a scene, I think there are several steps involved.

1. You have to "See" the picture in your mind
a lot of people look at a pretty sunset and go "ah!"
its another thing to look at a scene and go...
"thats the shot I want, I'll need my tripod, wide angle lens, & ND filter.
I need to get very low and shoot at this angle"

2. You have to capture that image with your camera
back to the sunset, lots of people grab their cameras & snap away.
but when the pics come out, they are dull & boring.
Chances are the "Auto" camera setting didnt capture the scene
like you saw it. You have to know your camera.

3. Photoshop
This can be an Art just like making a Fine Print
Half of what made Ansel Adams great was what he did in the darkroom.

Thank you. This was exactly how I thought of it also. I even thought of Ansel Adams, Atget and others as I was contemplating the importance of photo editing. I "see" shots in the my head all around me that goes well beyond the normal observation of others and I feel that initial recognition gets me further than photo editing would.

[Frog]

Seeing and capturing the shot are probably 95% for me if not more.
I always shoot in raw so some editing has to be done if I want to print it or post it even if its just converting to jpeg or tiff.
That being said, I've been able to rescue some shots that couldn't have made it without some adjustments.

[Wild Wassa]

"How much of photography is in the art of the initial photograph, subject, scene, etc. and how much of it is in the photo editing?"

Use the techniques that best allow you to communicate your thoughts.

An art teacher once said to me (concerning painting), allow the canvas to show. Don't use one stroke more than necessary and if you don't leave room for a viewer's imagination to enter your art because you are overpainting, give the game away and buy the book.

Just start and all will be revealed ... but know when to put the brush down.

Photography isn't art nor are the techniques art. Photography is both a medium and a technique used by artists ... and photo editing is just another of the techniques used within a technique.

Warren.

[Cathathome]

Photography isn't art nor are the techniques art. Photography is both a medium and a technique used by artists ... and photo editing is just another of the techniques used within a technique.

Warren.

With all due respect, Photography is an art form, the camera is the medium. Techniques are exactly that: a means to an end. Anybody can buy brushes and paint but may not produce "art" .The study of light, composition, perspective along with a thorough understanding of how different techniques affect the outcome is art in practice.

Learn your camera, study theories of photography, practise creating images. You are the artist.

[AgingEyes]

I think using the camera is first and foremost the using of a recording device. Whether what comes out is considered art, well, what is art anyway? :

So, what is Art anyway? What's the place of Photography there?

[ChowChi-Ching]

Also, I have had images in photoshop that I honestly could do nothing with because they just weren't that good of a shot. If you do not have a good base, then photoshop ain't gonna save ya. I think of photoshop as a tool, something that will help improve my photograph. It doesn't take the pics for me though.

[AgingEyes]

Also, I have had images in photoshop that I honestly could do nothing with because they just weren't that good of a shot. If you do not have a good base, then photoshop ain't gonna save ya.

Not so fast. You never know what those photoshop wizards could do to an image.

[danic]

You should always aim for good photography! It means you should have to do minimal editing.

Composition, exposure, DOF, they all play a part in your photography. You can adjust all of these by using photo editing software, but why do that when you can get it right the first time!

[Dylan8i]

photography for me is 99% in camera. the rest is just a tweak in the curves to get the color/light right. other wise why not just be a graphic artist and make your own pictures? its called photography for a reason.

[AgingEyes]

photography for me is 99% in camera. the rest is just a tweak in the curves to get the color/light right. other wise why not just be a graphic artist and make your own pictures? its called photography for a reason.

Photography is changing, more so after it became digital. Today it's more than simply recording what you see at the moment you press the shutter button. Some even take a photograph with post-processing in Photoshop and the like in mind. If you think about it, it is not even new. People have been merging photographs, creating special effect in their darkrooms for years. Digital age simply has a digital way to do that, perhaps more powerful. Some of you may not like it, but it's here to stay. And for those who see them as artists, Photoshop could be their friend.

[Wild Wassa]

"With all due respect, ..." - Cathathome.

No I will not accept that nor will I ever accept being patronized by a virtual artist ... but you can be as precious as you like with your art. Show me yours and I'll show you mine. The reference to painting was a metaphore ... isn't that what art is, a metaphore?

I've had 125 exhibitions of photography (painting and sculpture as well and not counting my new dA site) but these are only artefacts within the greater artifact called art. The National Gallery of Australia collects my artefacts they do not collect my art. I don't give them art. They think that I'm an artist ... I think that I just play at producing artefacts that the deluded called artworks ... because I can't help creating artefacts.

So photography is art then? ... I'll have to note that. Knowing this will give me something serious to think about as I prepare my next exhibition. I could be wrong about photography being just another medium within the greater artefact called art though ... but I doubt it.

Warren.

[Ron Kruger]

Interesting discussion. I'm old school and started shooting for publication before anything was "automatic," so I learned to concentrate totally upon getting the image right at the moment the shutter was pressed. But technological advances in cameras, digital and PhotoShop has expanded every aspect of photography, and that has added a new excitement about the medium that equals how I felt when I first started.
I still try to put more thought into setting up and executing the shot than on processing it, or fixing it, afterward.
I don't usually do much to my images in PS, but just as I did in the darkrooms years ago, I can always find some little thing that improves every shot.

[EOSThree]

Garbage in, Garbage out...

[Cathathome]

"With all due respect, ..." - Cathathome.

No I will not accept that nor will I ever accept being patronized by a virtual artist ... but you can be as precious as you like with your art. Show me yours and I'll show you mine. The reference to painting was a metaphore ... isn't that what art is, a metaphore?

I've had 125 exhibitions of photography (painting and sculpture as well and not counting my new dA site) but these are only artefacts within the greater artifact called art. The National Gallery of Australia collects my artefacts they do not collect my art. I don't give them art. They think that I'm an artist ... I think that I just play at producing artefacts that the deluded called artworks ... because I can't help creating artefacts.

So photography is art then? ... I'll have to note that. Knowing this will give me something serious to think about as I prepare my next exhibition. I could be wrong about photography being just another medium within the greater artefact called art though ... but I doubt it.

Warren.

Huh?

Just kidding

Methinks the definition of art vs artifact is another discussion altogether, though perhaps not as abstract.

Brushes and paint were analogous.

With all due respect= no disrespect intended

Back to the original point of the thread, I remain convinced that the process starts with the user and the camera. The eye through the lens, etc.

Ta,

Cath

[Franglais]

It's the result that counts. That's what people see. How you got that result is your business.

You need to be sure that you master the whole process enough to get results that seem right to you. That means seeing the potential image, getting the picture right and going any treatment required to get the thing into its final form (even printing is something to master).

[Wild Wassa]

It doesn't have to be "Good Photography vs. Good Photo Editing" ... it can be interesting photo editing in the digital darkroom.

Using the digital darkroom or doing more complex photo manipulations can be just as enjoyable as taking the photographs. You'll be thinking more about the possibilities within shots, that at your first glance may appear not to be what you envisaged

Photography becomes more affordable when on those bad days spent with the camera, salvage rights are afforded by that digital darkroom. With the ease of using digital darkrooms nowadays, it really is a wonderful time to be doing photography.

The first shot, of Lake King, was taken during my last visit to the Gippsland Lakes in Victoria. As a potential pictorial head turner, it is a most ordinary image. As a record of the waterway and channel marks, the outgoing current strength and for identifying and avoiding sandbanks and poor geographic wind in areas where we could run aground, the photo is most adequate. The geographic wind, is wind that has been disturbed by objects or landforms on the shore and is well described in the shot. For my boating purposes, this is a good record shot.





Few would see the features that I've mentioned above, so in the digital darkroom I wanted to portray the beauty of the lake system, to share the image further. This is a basic image, but the digital darkroom's potential is straight out of the Sunshine School of Pictorialism. The shot below has the fist layer of fine texture added.






What prompted me to explore this image was reading about one of my favourite Australian photographers, today. H. Beaufroy Merlin 1832-1873. Merlin was Australia's most travelled early pictorial photographer. http://photo-web.com.au/merlin/default.htm

I like H. Beaufroy Merlin. He and I have travelled and photographed in the same regions, but purely by coincidence. He followed a horse ... I follow a boat.

I have always liked Merlin's regional work but it was only today, while reading about his life and travels, that I realized that he and I have duplicated our works, subjects and our travels in SE regional Australia.

'Hazy Bright' after H Beaufroy Merlin. This image now looks like it is straight out of the Holtermann Collection.







Warren.

[draymorton]

It's the result that counts. That's what people see. How you got that result is your business.

Amen......

[Lori11]

Hi zoo and welcome! My only suggestion is shoot tons of photos, look at them, see what you like and dont like. Learn your camera, the beauty of digital is the delete key! No cost involved in a bad photo I dont have photoshop, so I have to be honest in what is good and bad with my photo's I have minor editing options
My other suggestion is spend as much time here as you can, I have learned more here than anywhere else! These folks are awesome and will help anytime. Start shooting! I had to use my camera THEN read the boook, I am a total visual person)

[xystren]

I really don't think this is an either or situation, but moves towards a "sum of the parts." philosophy.

Good photography certainly makes the photo editing process much easier, but good photo editing can also make photography process easier also. It is the combination of the two that make the end result.

I feel the lines blur and become very subjective when this question (especially when it comes to digital photography) is asked: When does a photo stop being a photo as a result of photo editing? Can it? Does it? Where a photograph ends and generated piece of art begins is very blurry to say the least. Regardless of your thoughts, it is very subjective.

Many who consider cloning out an undesirable spot in a photo to be standard practice in the digital world, could be considered blasphemy to photography purists in the film world. Is using different developer processes, burning, dodging, etc. in the darkroom more "pure" than doing the equivalent in a digital darkroom? They are just different ways of working within the different mediums.

I really feel there needs to be a balance between the two. Very rarely does one get a near perfect photograph that can just be printed (either film or digital) without some level of editing or tinkering.

Just a few of my thoughts,