Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

:iconsassaputzin: More from sassaputzin

More from DeviantArt


Submitted on
March 20, 2008


33 (who?)
ruining photography.... debate?

i was inspired to write this because of a recent journal i wrote on what is popular here on DA, i was also dared to make it a news article always being up for a challenge i've made it a news article......intrigued?.....if you class yourself as a photographer then you should be.

Here is the very firmly tongue in cheek journal i wrote ....although many a true word spoke in they say?
as said it covers what is popular here on D.A. especially that that is classed as photography... It was also inspired by a collective feeling that is out there relating to what is popular here on our beloved D.A. in the photography category. This collective feeling comes from people i watch and people that watch me.

I think the general 'feeling' is that what is appreciated as photography quite often has probably rather stepped into the realms of photo manipulation. There is no problem with photo manipulation and i know i am in danger of sounding like a photography snob i feel it only becomes a problem when well respected 'p photographers' mislead there many watchers by alluding to have taken a photo as opposed to their image being a photo manipulation.

Obviously this deceit can have a retrograding effect on the aspirations and achievements of an impressionable youth. Much of this debate will also encompass hdr and its over, and poor use to create an image that is more accurately categorised as photo manipulations.

ive also made some observations as to what i see as what is popular here on D.A. and i know ive opened myself up here to lots of stick.....especially among the cat owners (and im guilty in another way posting dog pictures ;)...but hey lets have some fun  with it, if you have any suggestions to the list then lets here them it seems its the way the thread is going.....  
so debate..:D
Add a Comment:
KLCraceQuality Featured By Owner Oct 1, 2008
i'm getting into hdr a bit and i've made a decision to categorize it under photo manipulation, even though i think that will lessen its chances to be seen.
RonaldGarcia Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2008   Interface Designer
well I think theres just a thin line between a photomanipulation and just editing a picture like levels brightness and contrast, we just have to finded but editing could not be bad, extremes are bad, at the end photoshop is just a tool like a camera filter...
CrinaPrida Featured By Owner Apr 14, 2008  Professional Photographer
a very interesting article - I will have to get beck to this one, because I also might have a few things to ask you regarding RAW processing.:D
PastyGuy Featured By Owner Mar 31, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
Ok, im not the best at debates usually for my lack of itellectual and nieve approach to an issue, but to me, alot of the stuff we see today, like what steve has pointed out is what so many people thought would happen with digital and that has made people sloppy in what they produce esspecially with computers (not only with photography, but many art scenes and especially graphic design were peices of work is created in less than ten minutes that would take 6 hours to screen print or letterpress) and your endless plethora of editing software were software companies are battleing it out to create the quickest, and most efficiant that money can buy and we all know what time

I mayby going off the point a little but for me, 'real' photography is all about getting the shot I want 'in feild' to reduce that time staring into my monitor for hours on end, but as i said before dA is for all talents of art no matter what they produce whether it is cats, over processed and over saturated waterscapes. Obviously I cant take the higher ground because ive been there, but that is what learning is all about, experimenting and finding what works for you the best not what get you attention and the next big thing on dA. If you really love what you do pageviews dont come into it or favs or Daily deviations, but they are there to help to give you a boost and get your work noticed. This will always be a debate on here especially after the 'you know who' insidence
EvaMcDermott Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008  Professional Photographer
Having spent many a year in a darkroom before going digital, there is a lot I consider photography and a lot I do not. I do use filters, HDR, and a little bit of Photoshop Elements to adjust contrast, lighting, sharpness, dodge and burn (a darkroom technique too). Filters - filters were a big part of B&W photography - red, orange, and yellow filters to darken the sky and make the clouds stand out. Today I use a polarizer (as I did with color film) to do the same 99% of the time with my digital camera. HDR = Cibachrome prints from slides. I did a lot of printing with Cibachrome paper and chemistry to print from slides because of the vibrant colors it produced. I now use HDR 50% of the time but I try to keep it real (yes, there is a lot of crappy stuff produced with HDR but there is also a lot of good stuff). Tonal range is still not up to snuff with digital vs. film work which is why I chose to use HDR sometimes. Some people say use gradient filters instead, but they produce a very different effect. I use them too but will NEVER use colored or special effects filters.

Anyway, glad you posted this article. It is spawning a lot of controversy and great comments. Thanks.
ParadigmParadox Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008
Everyone has made good points, I think the basic ideas are:

If a photo is adjusted to more accurately represent what the photographer actually saw...that is Photography.

If a photograph is substantially changed in tone, color or emphasis ,like extreme vignetting...that becomes Darkroom technique. (I think a lot of people forget that there is a digital darkroom category on DA, and that many more things belong there)

If the photograph is changed to add elements that were not there in the original or makes substantial use of filters etc., that alter the shapes of objects, that becomes Manipulation.

ALL of the above are art. Disclosure of the techniques used should be the issue, and there are way too many people that do not discuss what post processing they did. It doesn't mean writing a dissertation, or a need to discuss minor corrections...but if someone changes a sunset from gold to pink (whether through lens filters or Photoshop, they need to mention it. When you get really vivid sunsets "the hard way", seeing one that was manipulated can be frustrating.
Neutron2K Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2008
totally agree with these points. You've summed up what i've been trying to say for quite some time to people, I just lack the capacity to get my points across lol.
ParadigmParadox Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2008
Thanks... I don't speak up very often, but it's nice to know it was worth it. :)
zerocomplex Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2008
An image is an image is an image is an image, wether I printed it using materials dating back to 1900 using the sun as my exposure or whether it was produced in ps3 with layers and layers and layers.

No arguement will ever be won on the topic, and for obvious reasons.
Alex37 Featured By Owner Mar 25, 2008  Hobbyist Photographer
well no, but then it isnt a matter of winning or losing, merely raising awareness of the issue
Add a Comment: