I think waiting to try and fix composition problems in Photoshop allows the photographer to be lazy....best to strive for the best shot every time, you'll find yourself improving each shot instead of fixing after the fact.

just my :2 cents:

Agreed. P.S. has become a tool for the lazy. They fire away (like it takes talent) and expect you to clean up in post production. Sorry, I would not pay for such 'photography' work. I can have the neighborhood kid shoot like that if I am going to have to clean it all up later.

:disgust

I dont get it... some of the best guys in the industry and you call their remarks ingnorant and accuse them of "chest thumping"?


I'm humbled that they will even talk to me let alone give kudos to my work. I would not have the balls to question their approuch. Oh well.

As for me, Ive never cropped, retouched or done anything in photoshop. Every shot I posted and any shot I have ever sent to a client has been. Maybe it would be a benefit for me to know how and use it as a tool as Dean suggested, but that requires time and I've just never had the time to commit to it.

No "chest thumping" here, but photography is an art form in my mind. Seeing and producing the finished product in camera is the art in my opinion. Photoshop work is an art form in my opinion also, but they two art forms are not the same, with photoshop being an optional tool for those that require it.

:2 cents:

Lot's of nice pics in this thread...

Chest thumping: I was referring to some of the people in here that imply their images don't need any work. Very few images come out of the camera looking perfect and ready to go. VERY few.

Ignorance: Some of the non-photographers have made statements that are so, well, ignorant that I don't even want to begin correcting them.

We all knew what you were referring to.

from the samples you've shown... i dont think you have ever been shot by a pro...

Perhaps she should try one of us who aren't too proud to admit finishing up in Photoshop. :)

not true... give a guy all the skill and gadgets in the world.... if he doesn't have the 'eye' or talent.. he's not a photographer.. he's just a guy with a camera. Sure he can take a pretty picture and your average person will say 'ahhh.. thats pretty' .... to an artist and a photographer.. thats shit. :2 cents:

Dude, from looking at your site, your ego should be just a tad more in control. No disrespect intended, but you are cutting people down quite a bit, and i'm not seeing the pearls of wisdom you are throwing around, on your own site.

I'm not really sure what all the fuss is about. But Aaron got some answers and then some. :1orglaugh

Perhaps that is what happens when one hangs out with GFY bully trolls.
:winkwink:

You may be an excellent photographer, but that doesn't make you any less of a dick. :321GFY




I haven't knocking anyone for using photoshop. The question was about cropping/framing, which is what I've commented on up to this point. A photographers job is to take the picture. It should come out as good as possible. Some photographers like to enhance their work using photoshop; I think this can be a great tool. It's only a problem when photoshop is used as a primary tool instead of an enhancement. While I choose to not use photographers who do the extra "finishes" themselves, I believe that photographers who offer this as an option are much more marketable. :)

im sorry u feel that way... i just say it how i see it... just being honest... if you come to florida, ill make some time and shoot you for fun and show u the difference

Like I said, you ARE an excellent photographer. Even though we don't get along, I'll admit that. You have a great eye. You've just always been a dick to me -- ever since your very first response in one of my first threads so very long ago. :(


Maybe we can remedy that in Florida! :winkwink:

You two kids get a room already :winkwink:

remedy we shall.... i dont recall being a dick to you though... last i remember we were chillin in vegas at the warm up party...

Ok understand what im saying, if you shoot digital you need to know how to use photoshop. Having a "Eye" for the shot is the difference between a guy with a camera and a photographer, but having all the skills needed shoot the right shot, then do the proper post to it is indespensible. Ill get some of our glamour stuff togther with before and after pictures to show what im trying to say. A guy with the "Eye" and experience can make a great picture, but a guys with the "Eye" and a good understanding of the Tools made for Digital photgrapher make a picture that make people go WOW (and other photographers). Im not saying be sloppy with your shots, im saying embrace all the tools at your disposal to make the pictures the best they can be.

Thats my :2 cents: and let the flaming begin

hehe.. no flaming here... just havind a nice arguement/convo...


i still have to disagree... the whole point of a photographer is to capture a momnet, a subect..etc...... and be able to show others what he sees there that others dont.... bringing photoshop into this you are now a graphics guy just adding effects to a shot... and i still prefer film over digital.. the difference between film and digital to me is... people shoot a hundred shots in digital to get a handful of nice shots... they have forgotten how important a shot is and the time needed to make that shot.... with film, you take more time, you measure and calculate and almost everyshot comes out better... youre more conservative and concentrated...

Every single Female you shoot wants to look better in their shots, and with photoshop you can do that. I agree that you need to calculate you shots, and set them up.

100........

Photoshop is a tool just like the camera and it can do wonders in the right hands. Put both those tools into the right hands and you get amazing results

Damn i ran out of time editing the last post

Everyone has their style of shooting and what they like and dont like, or will do and wont do. If it makes the photographers vision better who is to say it isnt right? It really comes down to individual taste

true... this can go back and forth forever and no one answer will derrive from it.... it's all a matter a taste and style...etc.. :pimp

Good post, and I would totally agree that a lot of 'photographers' don't take the time needed to make the shot, but saying a photog who uses PS to enhance a shot after the fact is now a 'graphics guy' is a little harsh, IMHO. Some of the old school photogs who've adopted the transition from film to digital and use PS might see it as a way of enhancing their 'art'.

For example:

http://www.foxyanya.com/graphics/any...udes-anya1.jpg

http://www.foxyanya.com/graphics/any...udes-anya2.jpg

Had Tom Ruddock not enhanced the images we shot, I doubt I'd be posting them here. :winkwink: However, I love his vision and his ability to see beyond the 'moment' and very much appreciate that he took the time to share his 'vision' this way. I would hardly call a photog of his caliber just a 'graphics guy', though. Just my lil :2 cents:

Anya

That's because my site is an "Amateur" site. I'm disappointed that you didn't figure that out for yourself.

those are great shots... but it becomes more of an illustration than a photo... im not saying a photographer is a 'graphics guy' because he used photoshop... but you lose alot of the actual focus when u do this... shooting models is about having the model be the point of interest and be first thing u see when u look at the picture... the background dominates what should be the main focus (the model)... imo...

Thanks Al :)
I can't say I agree with you on the background issue, but I'm biased because it's me in the pics. :winkwink:
Photographers each have their own vision and I truly respect that.
Now the 'props' guy standing underneath me holding the fan... he had an entirely different 'view' altogether. :)

Anya

Excellent posts, both of you.

That is a nice pic.

I have to agree with DonovanPhillips, SinisterStudios and benc here.

A lot of "old school" here trying to make it a dick competition and then contradicting themselves saying that they said something else altogether, well didn't sound that way.

Now, read it once and read it again - Time is relative!

Shooting for 10-15 years doesn't mean you've been improving the whole time. A talented newbie can learn to shoot better photos in a month than the old school pros with decades of experience. Dinosaurs usually only grow their ego's - one has to adapt, improve and innovate. Photoshop is part of that.

Now about cropping - most the first posters here said how they crop in camera and made it sound like photoshop is for newbies and not for REAL, PRO photographers. Sounded to me that they were just bitter they weren't good at photoshop.

Me? I crop in Photoshop. Why?

1. Cause I want the photos to be PERFECT!
2. It's faster, atleast for me.
3. It lets you take it easy and focus on getting more out of the model, rather than your camera, during the shoot.

Photoshop skill IS an important factor when hiring a photographer!!!

"3. It lets you take it easy and focus on getting more out of the model, rather than your camera, during the shoot."

there's a diff between quality and quantity.... the less time you spend behind the computer fixing your pics so theyre 'perfect' the better... youre just doubling your work for no reason... i'd rather take one good shot then take 50 and sit there for hours picking out the best one and make them 'perfect'... the less you take the easier it is to pick the best shot....

and all this 'true photographers need to adapt and evolve' is a bunch of BS imo.... take a look at some of top pro's that I would bow to in their presense... they still use film and respect that more than anything... ansel adams, jerry ulesman...etc.... if you think these guys grow their ego's than you have much much much to learn...

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Not to be rude, but thats some funny shit. Sorry, I so could not help myself.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I am a professional photographer and the answer to your question truly varies with what you intend to do with the image. It has to do with what we call pre-visualization, that is, seeing the final output before you ever take the photo.

Here are some examples:

If I am shooting a product, I might frame it far more loosly because the art director may want to use the extra space for something.

If I am shooting a model portfolio, I would frame more tightly.

In the old days, before digital, when we used a square format camera, I often framed a bit wide so I could decide whether to make the shot a vertical or horizontal.

With digital, if you frame wide and them crop down, you are effectively reducing the number of pixels, turning a six or eight megapixel camera into maybe a three or even two meg camera...which doesn't make a lot of sense if you can avoid it.

But there is also another consideration; the camera's digital sensor is a specific shape, and sometimes you have no choice but to frame larger because the shape does not correspond with the requirements of the final output.

A final thought, lately I have been cropping down to different size ratios (not 8x10 but, maybe 4x10) after taking the shot because I find that a more interesting and artistically pleasing aspect ratio for the final print. Our eyes see more horizontally than vertically, so I like these wider shots, even though my camera does not shoot it that way.

I suspect this has been absolutely no help at all!

Brutal

I think it depends on the subject matter & purpose of the shoot. I like to leave room for cropping on some shots so I can play around afterwards with different looks - tight crops, subject heavily weighted to one side etc. Cropping the image in camera certainly would speed up the production process on a standard model shoot, but it also limits your options later on, possibly impeding your artistic vision.

Are you telling me that all your photos are perfect enough not to do any work on them in photoshop afterwards?

No offence, but naming photographers and them using/respecting film just makes you a sheep. It's like saying: "Eat shit - 500 million flies can't be wrong!".

No offence taken - All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. :winkwink:

like is said... you have much much to learn..

t

thr flies are wrong?