Does using photoshop mean that you're a bad photographer?

Question

I photoshop all my pictures, and my friend told me that photoshop is like masking you're bad photography skills; which kinda hurt, since i think i'm a decent photographer and i really care about her opinion too.

here are some of my photoshopped images:

http://i34.tinypic.com/6z6a6r.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/4jqmh3.jpg

http://i38.tinypic.com/2z8ov89.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/29q1a1j.jpg

http://i37.tinypic.com/aaanb6.jpg

Answer 1

It depends.

If the photographer has to use Photoshop to "fix" the mistakes they make using their camera, then yes, it does mean they are a poor photographer.

If the photographer is just using Photoshop to make minor corrections at the clients request or are using it to append the EXIF data with copyright notice, contact information and key words ... no.  It would just be part of the photographers work-flow.

If the person using Photoshop is really an artist, Photoshop is just one of their tools.

My question to you is why did you feel you had to use Photoshop on your images?  All of them could have been composed and exposed in the camera without having to use Photoshop

Answer 2

Photoshop often gets tagged as little more than a rescue vehicle for failed photographs (and that's often how it's used), but it's real use is as tool realize a photographic vision. Even top-flight photographers use post-processing tools to help them interpret their image files as they would like them to be seen.

Charles Cramer  http://www.charlescramer.com  is one of the best landscape photographers alive, and he does a good deal of Photoshop work to almost every image to help him realize his vision. Take a look and tell me if he has "bad photography skills"

As for your photos, I like 'em. Aside from a creative sense of color, you have a good eye for angles and composition.

Answer 3

I don't agree with photoace all that much but in this case we are in some agreement.  Fantastic pictures were taken prior to the computer and the internet and even without darkroom magic other than knowing how to print the picture correctly.  It is said that over 90% of the photographs are now photoshopped, so you have to wonder why.

Answer 4

I think these photos are fantastic! Especially the chalk ones. Don't even worry about it. I use Photoshop all the time. Photoshop is one of the major needs of a photographer. That's what I learned in a photo class. Pictures usually turn out to be very dull, which is one good use for photoshop. If you use it and completely fake out your photo, it could be considered bad photography. These photos look very good, though.

Answer 5

Using Photoshop or another image editing program is fine for making slight adjustments to a picture to improve it, such as adjusting color temperature, contrast, etc.

The problem is that most people depend WAY too much on Photoshop, and expect that they can magically "fix" anything on the computer.  You'll see a lot of questions here, where people ask "how do u fix a blurry pic" (usually because they can't spell either).  If you use Photoshop as a crutch because you don't know basic photographic techniques and expect the computer to fix horrible, grainy and out of focus snapshots, then that's a problem.  But using it to make minor adjustments to improve a picture is fine.

The other problem is that most people completely over-edit pictures, to the point that they don't even look real anymore.  I've seen pictures here where they will manipulate the color temperature and saturation to the point where the picture will look completely orange or green, and doesn't even look real anymore.  That's not photography.  It might be graphic arts, but it's not photography.  They just end up ruining what might otherwise be a good picture.

So really, it depends on how you use it.  If you use Photoshop to just make minor adjustments to improve your pictures, that's fine.  But don't rely on it too much.  The key is to try to get the picture right the first time, with the CAMERA.  Get the right lighting and the proper exposure, with a good composition.  Photoshop can be used conservatively to improve a picture that was already good to begin with...but it can't make a mediocre picture into a good one.  

A good photographer doesn't rely on editing pictures.  It might be a helpful tool sometimes, but they shouldn't have to rely on it.

By the way, I take landscape photos and I don't edit my pictures.  I don't even have Photoshop on my computer.  I just use a basic editing program just to crop my pictures and resize them to upload them online, but that's about all I do.

Here are a few pictures I took recently.  This is with a manual 35mm rangefinder film camera.  This was with Kodak Gold 200 film.  These are scans directly from the original photos, I didn't edit them at all.  Notice the warm tones and good color saturation...this was because I took the pictures near sunset, when the sun was lower in the sky.  So the lighting was better.  The picture with the sunflowers is using selective focus, with a wider aperture so I could soften the background...

  http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f86/ga...

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f86/ga...

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f86/ga...

You don't need Photoshop for good pictures.

EDIT:  A lot of people try to use Ansel Adams to justify editing pictures, or they  take his quotes completely out of context.  What people need to remember is that he was a master landscape photographer.  He would use large format cameras, and set the aperture to f-32 with super long exposures...just to get a long depth of field and the absolute sharpest picture possible.  He knew how to use his cameras.  He didn't take mediocre snapshots and then edit them to "fix" them.  His photographs were good to begin with.

Answer 6

i think it depends on the degree of the editing

if you were to try and take a picture of a sunset, fail and then add one in on photoshop then yes that would make you a bad photographer.

if you were to take a picture and airbrush a spot, or make small moderations to enhance rather than change then no. Photoshop can be as much as a skill as photography is, it just depends on how its used.

Answer 7

your ok but u can use a little work

Answer 8

No I don't think it does. And let me just say you are awesome!!!!

I am inspired xD

What do you do with the photo shop? Lighting or shading? That's not covering up bad skills. Its just adding to your great ones .

Answer 9

well there is a point where you would either be called a photographer or a graphic artist. photographers paint with light not graphics. photographers MAKE the image, they don't TAKE the image then fix it.

Answer 10

No, that would be like saying does using a darkroom make someone a bad photographer. Ansel Adams is regarded as one of the best photographers of all time, and much of his great output was due to being VERY skilled in the darkroom. He was able to make his photos match his vision, something even he could not always accomplish in the camera. Photoshop is simply the 21st century equivalent of the film darkroom. Many of the tools and procedures in Photoshop are direct decendants of the darkroom. It is as necessary as the camera to good photography today.

I will add, however, that I also agree that when someone is using it to only be trying to make their photos usuable because they have no clue how to get a decent shot in the camera, then yes, they are a bad photographer and are using Photoshop as a crutch to try to cover up their lack of skill / knowledge.

So Photoshop is sort of a double edged sword. Like most anything else, it can be used correctly.... or abused.

steve