Comments on: Photography Versus Photoshop

By: Gus hallgren

Gus hallgren — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:53:55 +0000

Hi Tim,

I enjoy your Darkroom Digest newsletter, and after finding nothing on printing in Photoshop CS3 Workflow I was delighted to find you have a Digital Printing Newsletter. How can I subscribe to this? I am not looking
for something free, and don’t mind spending a few bucks.

As far as the subject mentioned here ~ I photograph birds, and try to shoot photos that need nothing but slight tonal adjustments, and minimal sharpening ~ USM & Smart Sharpening usually over kill. In fact my wife shoots bird photos handheld that are so good, I can make 13 x 19 prints using 72 DPI that are amazingly beautiful.

Best regards ~ Gus

By: Balan Vinod

Balan Vinod — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:46:47 +0000

Thanks Tim for making this point. Photoshop is to make good images better and not a FIX tool. Photography being an art, one should try to get it right with the optics and light. You said it right PS should not be a crutch.

Balan Vinod

By: Tim Grey

Tim Grey — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:26:58 +0000

This is an excellent point. It is important to distinguish between “fix it in Photoshop” and “make it ready for Photoshop”. For images such as composite panoramas or high dynamic range (HDR) images, there is certainly nothing wrong with relying on post-processing for the final result.

By: Sean Phillips

Sean Phillips — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:48:37 +0000

I think you really need to distinguish between fixing it in Photoshop, which implies a mistake was made or the original was poor quality, and planning for photoshop, as in HDR or panoramas. My camera is simply not capable of take a good looking photo when there is a bright sky and a much darker foreground. In that case I plan the photo FOR Photoshop. I still try to get the highest quality originals that I can, but this is entirely different than a poorly shot photo that must be “salvaged”…