Monthly Photo Assignment

[AndrewWG]

Agreed Andrew, unless you're adjust contrast/color or adding a border, no over-the-top photoshopping should be allowed.

Yeah, I'd go with that. I guess for those lucky enough to be able to shoot in RAW have to process them to some degree anyways and that is obviously fine too, white balance, etc.

Andy

 

[jann1033]

I haven't heard anyone use the term 'fortnight' since I saw my highschool's drama club "try" to do Shakespeare.

But I think everyone over here should use it too, I'm in favor of more Americans learning a second language.

BTW, if something last for three weeks, do you guys say a fortnight and a half?

man are you demanding! like American English and photography isn't enough of a brain stretch for some of us, now we have to learn English/Australian English too?
btw oblio must have some crazy callused feet

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I was with you until this part. I think that photoshop does not teach a person how to become a better photographer. If I look at a scene and think "I can just photoshop that tree out" instead of thinking "how can I get the image and not ahve that tree in there", well I may as well just sit here at the computer and take my already existing photos and make a super cool one without even taking out the camera. I'll go with what people want on this one, just my tuppence, um.. two cents.

Andy

If the idea was just to faithfully represent reality, I'd agree. I prefer to think of photography as an open ended art form. Photoshop is just another tool. Some examples of using photoshop in ways that may seem more appealing artisitically than simply removing an unwanted element from a photo:

* Selectively dropping the luminance of the blue channel before converting to black and white to improve the constrast between the sky and the clouds. In the old days this was done with filters. Now everyone does the same thing in Photoshop.

* Mating two exposures together into one high dynamic range photo in order to capture a scene with a dynamic range that exceed the capabilities of your camera.

* Using photoshop to soften the skin texture of someone's face while maintaining sharpness in their eyes and hair. This could be done with makeup or with photoshop. I think trying to deal with smooth rough skin in Photoshop will teach you more about photography than playing with makeup.

* Replacing the color of a subject's red shirt with green because it works better with the rest of the composition. Maybe you could ask the subject to change shirts, but maybe you can't. If you can't, I don't think that you should be stuck with a contrasting color when you want a complimentary color just because that was what was there when you took the picture.

* Reducing sensor noise because the scene you shot was poorly lit and you couldn't control the lighting.

* Selectively sharpening only your subject and not the out-of-focus areas.

* Replacing a choppy and uninteresting lake with a calm lake reflecting the hues that rise above it.

* Correcting the green shadows under the cap of your subject because you took a shot of them standing in the sun on the grass.

* Super-impose a much larger moon over the normal sized moon to simulate the use of a super-telephoto lens.

Like you said, I'll go with whatever the rules are. However, I see photography as an art form, not just recording what we see. I like to use every tool and trick available to create my artistic vision. That might mean studio lights, reflectors, filters, or (in the old days) dark room techniques. I don't see the digital darkroom techniques available today as being any less positive than the old darkroom techniques used by Ansel Adams back in his day.

 

[jann1033]

not that i have a lot of say but i'd rather skip the contest thing since there is already a contest but, if it's a contest i agree that photoshop should be kept at a minimum.

otherwise any thing goes, if you photoshop the death out of it that is up to you since it's not a competition... even though i agree you'd learn more not doing it. personally i could use some photoshop help and since that is kind of the darkroom now, i think as long as you aren't doing stuff like adding a different sky and similar stuff that totally changes what you took, the normal stuff you can do non layers is ok with me.

i mean it's supposed to be a learning experience for all and all don't have the same software programs at their disposal either which is one reason i don't like the contest idea

 

[photo_chick]

I was with you until this part. I think that photoshop does not teach a person how to become a better photographer. If I look at a scene and think "I can just photoshop that tree out" instead of thinking "how can I get the image and not ahve that tree in there", well I may as well just sit here at the computer and take my already existing photos and make a super cool one without even taking out the camera. I'll go with what people want on this one, just my tuppence, um.. two cents.

Andy

I tend to agree that Photoshop can help make a photographer look better than they actually are. HOWEVER, I think it still requires the same basic design skills that are required to compose a photograph, or create any meaningful art for that matter. I know in the darkroom I have dodged out things from images, combined negatives to make different images, and done other things in camera with multiple exposures that can easily be accomplished with photoshop. Altering photographs in artistic photography is nothing new, just easier to do now.

 

[deletedpenguin]

You all make very valid points. Minimal photoshopping should be allowed.

 

[AndrewWG]

Ok, to try to answer all of these:

First off, just to make it clear, I am not against anything that is decided and I am not against anyone having their own ideas of photography. I am just debating the issue. I say this before I p*** anyone off. That is not my intention.

Personally, I hate photoshopped images other than for entertainment value. I don't believe that a photographer should make a world that doesn't exist. Is it pleasing to the eye? Yes. Is it a place I would like to visit? Yes. Can I? No. It doesn't exist except on someones hard drive. Everyone else can photoshop away, if that is what makes them happy with their photography, but I would not be proud of that work.

In response:

Mark and photo_chick,
I agree that since photoshopping is available (and I am going to assume that you two are correct in saying that these alterations were done in the dark ages as well), that it should and could be used today to some degree. I just don't see the need for a computer assignment at this time. These are supposed to be photo assignments. I would actually entertain the idea of having a fortnight or two of these assignments be of "before and after photoshopped photos" to show people what can be done. I think it would be fun and artsy, but ... well I 'll get off my soapbox.

I'm not all that good at photoshop, although that can be directly correlated to me owning photoshop elements 1 (I think). Other than a couple of assignments, I think that PS should be kept to a minimum. I guess I just like the "represent reality" idea. I even feel like a cheat when I just crop photos!

Jann,
I agree that we should keep the contest thing out of it. In fact if it is a contest, I won't even enter. I may try the assignment, but my photos will not compare to those with much superior equipment and will not be entered unless God shines his light down on me and I get something that I think would even come close to being comparable (especially if people are using photoshop).


So everyone should just decide what they want. I'll try not to chime in on the subject anymore.

Andy

 

[jann1033]

it worked fine when handicap did it...do we really have to fix what wasn't broken to start with

 

[Gdad]

Photoshop can enhance a good photo and make it better- I have not seen any photo editing software that can take a crummy photo and make it good. I think it should be allowed- if someone tries to make crazy modifications to a shot- cloning out trees, etc- I think the results will speak for themselves anyway. Maybe if the ‘contest’ element is not involved and it is just a collective shoot people would not mind so much.

Also- I definitely think it is important that the shots be taken during the assignment period. I prefer the two week period also as I think a month would stagnate. Unlike the weekly photo contest rule (which I understand of course- everyone is not at Disney all the time) if these are general categories I prefer to see pictures taken during the collective shoot- not just your all time favorite ‘spring’ picture for example.

Just my $.02

 

[MarkBarbieri]

It sounds like the contest part is a bad idea. I thought it would draw in more participants, but sounds like it would actually discourage people from submitting.

I just don't see the need for a computer assignment at this time.

I'm not advocating that any of the assignments be computer related. I'm advocating that people not be banned from using any particular techniques in their assignment work. For example, I wouldn't want an assignment like 'The Clone Tool', but I would like to be able to use the clone tool in an assignment on 'Spring'.



I understand that some people prefer photography to be constrained to purely representational work. I don't think that should be the rule. I see photography as an art and would no more constrain photography to pure representationalism than I would constrain that painters only paint what they see.

I would also like to point out that the notion of a pure and unretouched photo is a vast oversimplification anyway. Just about every digital camera on the market today records a series of green, blue, and red dots and then does a bunch of manipulation. They use a computer program to convert the three different colored dots into 16+ million colored dots we see. They enhanced constrast differences to make the photo look sharper. They adjust the white balance of the photo. They adjust the saturation of the photo. They apply filters to remove moire patterns.

It's not just digital image manipulation that we do with our cameras either. One of the big draws to using a DSLR is the ability to shoot with very narrow depth-of-field. Such shots are often beautiful, but that's not the way things look in real life. The same is true for polarizing filters, warming filters, soft focus filters, etc. We also adjust our "view" of reality by using wide angle and telephoto lenses. Neither of those gives much of a "normal" view. Instead, they are tools to help us create photos that tell a story.

Beyond the camera itself, many photographers manipulate the scenes that they shoot. We use flashes to add light. We put the flashes in different places to light the scene differently. We use reflectors to change the light even more. We sometimes use colored reflectors to compensate for color casts already in the light or to change the light color to suit our needs.

I recently went to a wildlife photography seminar put on by someone who rarely uses photoshop for anything but cropping. He does, however, use 5 different flashes to shoot hummingbirds. The background for the shot is a painted poster. The flower the hummingbird drinks from masks a tube filled with sugar water. The shots look beautiful and natural, but when you pull back, you see that almost everything about the scene has been manipulated.

Another common photo manipulation is shooting in B&W. This is not, unless you're a dog, the way the world looks. For every serious B&W shooter I know, it's not even a straight translation of our world into B&W. It's an attempt to translate our world into a scene that shows contrasts rather than colors. These contrasts are almost manipulated using color filters on the camera or in the digital darkroom. The color filters allow you to make selected colors lighter or darker when they are converted to B&W.

I think that a photographer should be free to tell a story however they choose. That may be by manipulating the scene before capturing it. That may be by loading their camera with special lenses, filters, and settings. That may be by adjusting their photo in the physical or digital darkroom. My preference is that we not put artificial limits on the photographer's tools for telling the story.

The assignments are about learning photography. Why ban part of the photographic process from the assignments?

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I definitely think it is important that the shots be taken during the assignment period.

I agree. I think the best justification for these assignments is to encourage people to think, shoot, and learn. You'll learn more by shooting than you will by sifting through your catalog trying to find images that match.

If there is a case where you already have an image that you think is a beautiful example of the assignment, I think it should be OK to post it (with full disclosure) as an inspiration or example, but you should still do the assignment.

 

[jann1033]

It sounds like the contest part is a bad idea. I thought it would draw in more participants, but sounds like it would actually discourage people from submitting.


I'm not advocating that any of the assignments be computer related. I'm advocating that people not be banned from using any particular techniques in their assignment work. For example, I wouldn't want an assignment like 'The Clone Tool', but I would like to be able to use the clone tool in an assignment on 'Spring'.



I understand that some people prefer photography to be constrained to purely representational work. I don't think that should be the rule. I see photography as an art and would no more constrain photography to pure representationalism than I would constrain that painters only paint what they see.

I would also like to point out that the notion of a pure and unretouched photo is a vast oversimplification anyway. Just about every digital camera on the market today records a series of green, blue, and red dots and then does a bunch of manipulation. They use a computer program to convert the three different colored dots into 16+ million colored dots we see. They enhanced constrast differences to make the photo look sharper. They adjust the white balance of the photo. They adjust the saturation of the photo. They apply filters to remove moire patterns.

It's not just digital image manipulation that we do with our cameras either. One of the big draws to using a DSLR is the ability to shoot with very narrow depth-of-field. Such shots are often beautiful, but that's not the way things look in real life. The same is true for polarizing filters, warming filters, soft focus filters, etc. We also adjust our "view" of reality by using wide angle and telephoto lenses. Neither of those gives much of a "normal" view. Instead, they are tools to help us create photos that tell a story.

Beyond the camera itself, many photographers manipulate the scenes that they shoot. We use flashes to add light. We put the flashes in different places to light the scene differently. We use reflectors to change the light even more. We sometimes use colored reflectors to compensate for color casts already in the light or to change the light color to suit our needs.

I recently went to a wildlife photography seminar put on by someone who rarely uses photoshop for anything but cropping. He does, however, use 5 different flashes to shoot hummingbirds. The background for the shot is a painted poster. The flower the hummingbird drinks from masks a tube filled with sugar water. The shots look beautiful and natural, but when you pull back, you see that almost everything about the scene has been manipulated.

Another common photo manipulation is shooting in B&W. This is not, unless you're a dog, the way the world looks. For every serious B&W shooter I know, it's not even a straight translation of our world into B&W. It's an attempt to translate our world into a scene that shows contrasts rather than colors. These contrasts are almost manipulated using color filters on the camera or in the digital darkroom. The color filters allow you to make selected colors lighter or darker when they are converted to B&W.

I think that a photographer should be free to tell a story however they choose. That may be by manipulating the scene before capturing it. That may be by loading their camera with special lenses, filters, and settings. That may be by adjusting their photo in the physical or digital darkroom. My preference is that we not put artificial limits on the photographer's tools for telling the story.

The assignments are about learning photography. Why ban part of the photographic process from the assignments?

i agree with this , don't really understand why it matters if it's not a contest, you do what you want for the subject. if it bothers some, maybe we can post what we did along with the photo.... something like "new head put on subject due to extreme ugliness"... for major changes...then everyone will be happy plus if we like an effect we can know how it was done.

 

[fitzperry]

i agree with this , don't really understand why it matters if it's not a contest, you do what you want for the subject. if it bothers some, maybe we can post what we did along with the photo.... something like "new head put on subject due to extreme ugliness"... for major changes...then everyone will be happy plus if we like an effect we can know how it was done.

FWIW (probably not much ) I agree with you. I always check out the winners on dpchallenge, and boy there are some heavily photoshopped images in some of those challenges. Personally, I don't usually care for that overly processed look, but I do appreciate it when people explain the steps they took in their processing, especially when they also post the unedited original.

Anyway, if it's not a contest, I don't see why it really matters. If the point is to challenge yourself, and you want to challenge yourself in the "digital darkroom," then have at it as far as I'm concerned. But the point is also to help everyone improve their skills, and explaining the post processing would go a long way in that regard.

 

[Gdad]

It sounds like the contest part is a bad idea. I thought it would draw in more participants, but sounds like it would actually discourage people from submitting.


I'm not advocating that any of the assignments be computer related. I'm advocating that people not be banned from using any particular techniques in their assignment work. For example, I wouldn't want an assignment like 'The Clone Tool', but I would like to be able to use the clone tool in an assignment on 'Spring'.



I understand that some people prefer photography to be constrained to purely representational work. I don't think that should be the rule. I see photography as an art and would no more constrain photography to pure representationalism than I would constrain that painters only paint what they see.

I would also like to point out that the notion of a pure and unretouched photo is a vast oversimplification anyway. Just about every digital camera on the market today records a series of green, blue, and red dots and then does a bunch of manipulation. They use a computer program to convert the three different colored dots into 16+ million colored dots we see. They enhanced constrast differences to make the photo look sharper. They adjust the white balance of the photo. They adjust the saturation of the photo. They apply filters to remove moire patterns.

It's not just digital image manipulation that we do with our cameras either. One of the big draws to using a DSLR is the ability to shoot with very narrow depth-of-field. Such shots are often beautiful, but that's not the way things look in real life. The same is true for polarizing filters, warming filters, soft focus filters, etc. We also adjust our "view" of reality by using wide angle and telephoto lenses. Neither of those gives much of a "normal" view. Instead, they are tools to help us create photos that tell a story.

Beyond the camera itself, many photographers manipulate the scenes that they shoot. We use flashes to add light. We put the flashes in different places to light the scene differently. We use reflectors to change the light even more. We sometimes use colored reflectors to compensate for color casts already in the light or to change the light color to suit our needs.

I recently went to a wildlife photography seminar put on by someone who rarely uses photoshop for anything but cropping. He does, however, use 5 different flashes to shoot hummingbirds. The background for the shot is a painted poster. The flower the hummingbird drinks from masks a tube filled with sugar water. The shots look beautiful and natural, but when you pull back, you see that almost everything about the scene has been manipulated.

Another common photo manipulation is shooting in B&W. This is not, unless you're a dog, the way the world looks. For every serious B&W shooter I know, it's not even a straight translation of our world into B&W. It's an attempt to translate our world into a scene that shows contrasts rather than colors. These contrasts are almost manipulated using color filters on the camera or in the digital darkroom. The color filters allow you to make selected colors lighter or darker when they are converted to B&W.

I think that a photographer should be free to tell a story however they choose. That may be by manipulating the scene before capturing it. That may be by loading their camera with special lenses, filters, and settings. That may be by adjusting their photo in the physical or digital darkroom. My preference is that we not put artificial limits on the photographer's tools for telling the story.

The assignments are about learning photography. Why ban part of the photographic process from the assignments?

Well said Mark- I agree completely.

 

[Amy]

I was with you until this part. I think that photoshop does not teach a person how to become a better photographer. If I look at a scene and think "I can just photoshop that tree out" instead of thinking "how can I get the image and not ahve that tree in there", well I may as well just sit here at the computer and take my already existing photos and make a super cool one without even taking out the camera. I'll go with what people want on this one, just my tuppence, um.. two cents.

Andy

I'm with Andy on this one. Yes, Photoshop is a great tool, but I'd hoped that this new contest would help with developing my "eye" as a photographer, not my Photoshop skills. For example, I have mostly yellow tulips at home; if the assignment is "something red," all I have to do it Photoshop my yellow tulips and make them red. I haven't actively searched for "red" things to photograph.

OR....to make everybody happy.....how about the contest is a month long, with 2 weeks/1 fortnight for shots straight out of the camera and then 2 weeks/1fortnight for Photoshopped images on the same subject? That would help us budding photographers to see a "normal" photo and then what can be done with it in Photoshop.

 

[DVC Jen]

Being so new I can see both sides of the photoshop issue.

I personally want to improve both my camera AND my photoshop skills.

I do not really think this needs to be a contest, but instead a tool to help each of us, regardless of our skill level, to improve and grow. There is no way I could fairly compete with so many who post here - I simply don't have the experience yet - so why bother? UNLESS it is merely to help me grow as a photographer... and THAT is the whole reason I hang out on this forum anyway.

I also think it would be so awesome to actually see the growth in each one of us as we go from theme to theme.

If we don't do the contest - I don't have a problem with a photoshopped image, as long as the person was honest about it being photoshopped instead of trying to pass it off as "really looking that way when I took it <wink wink>". I would like to know how it was photoshopped - maybe even seeing the original and then have a detailed description of what was photoshopped and how it was done. That way we can use that persons image as our own tool to improve our personal photoshop and or photographic skills.

Maybe we could also list the lens and settings we used to take the photo we post. Again - as a tool to help others grow.

I think we are all here because we either want to improve or help others improve by sharing our knowledge.

 

[LPZ_Stitch!]

I'm with Andy on this one. Yes, Photoshop is a great tool, but I'd hoped that this new contest would help with developing my "eye" as a photographer, not my Photoshop skills. For example, I have mostly yellow tulips at home; if the assignment is "something red," all I have to do it Photoshop my yellow tulips and make them red. I haven't actively searched for "red" things to photograph.

I'd just like to throw my $0.02 into this discussion and say that I agree with AndrewWG and Amy.

To my mind, Photoshopping is an entirely different skill from photographing. I've worked with some really great graphic artists (who aren't photographers) who could basically take anything you give them and turn it into something attractive.

Like Amy, I'd prefer to learn to take better photos ... not continue to take mediocre photos, but learn how to spruce them up on the computer.

I think it comes down to are we going to have a "create an image" assignment, or a "take a photo assignment."

There's nothing wrong with either, but I'd prefer the latter.

 

[klmall]

As a true amateur, learning the basics of photography I agree with Amy and LPZ Stitch. I enjoy the challenge of trying something new - practically everything in photography is new to me! My untutored eye sometimes sees things worthy of photographing but doesn't capture them as well as it should. Photo Assignments or whatever would give me a reason to stretch as well as great examples to learn from.

On the other hand, I would like to see in a separate thread of some kind examples of photoshopped images WITH the before and after and some of the process detailed. Many of us work with or help others with photos for albums, posters, and fun projects with the kids and it would be great to see what people do with Photoshop.

Just my 2 cents worth!

 

[mabas9395]

Well, lets stop talking about it and get started!!!

BTW, today's WTD comic was particularly timely.

 

[DVC Jen]

Well, lets stop talking about it and get started!!!

BTW, today's WTD comic was particularly timely.

That is funny. There was another one in the comics the other day about a father taking a portrait of his family and trying to make everyone look better. In the end they ended up looking like clowns and the angry mother said - now let's make YOU look better. My DH and I laughed a long time over that one.

Most professional photographers will tell you they photoshop their images.. it is reality for this day and age of computers and fancy electronics and it really isn't any different than darkroom tricks - just more "modern".

Now with that being said - for those of us (me) who really do need to improve thier basic photography skills this assignment will stretch our abilities and help us grow as photographers.

For those who post here who are much more advanced photographers if they post their before and after photos with the camera settings and tell us what they did and maybe how they did it in regards to photoshopping we can learn two things from their experience and not just one.