Sufficiently advanced photoshop is indistinguishable from magic.

[Richter]

I'm with Nigel here.  Photography has a certain veracity and value from the fact that it's capturing a real life moment.  Finishing or editing a photo may make a pretty picture, but if it's adding in elements it never had, and the photographer was too lazy to find, it ruins that genuine source.  National Geographic would not stand for that shit.

[Elder Iptuous]

there's more than one purpose for photography.  sure Nat Geo wouldn't stand it, because they're trying to show the world as it is.  (would they allow lens flare removal?)  I can understand the appeal of the veracity that you mention.
But, some photography is intended to show create an ideal scene for the sake of art or advertisement.  it's just as valid a use though.
if in the example in the video, the photographer had taken the effort to modify the scene by removing those poles, cutting down that tree, going over the ground with a fine toothed comb to remove any trash and divets and then took the picture, would that be preferable?

[Kai]

This is pretty fucking incredible. I definitely agree with Nigel that I'm not into the "I don't want that tree there, remove it" is disgusting.

But, I got to the last photo, the panorama, and I thought HOLY SHIT. 

[Kai]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgKjs8ZjQNg&feature=related

HOLY SHIT THEY REPAIRED THE PARTHENON.

[Elder Iptuous]

HOLY SHIT THEY REPAIRED THE PARTHENON.

they came in first place in a non-existent race...

[Kai]

HOLY SHIT THEY REPAIRED THE PARTHENON.

they came in first place in a non-existent race...

What?

I think it's pretty clear that a person can't trust any digital photos anymore.

[Elder Iptuous]

HOLY SHIT THEY REPAIRED THE PARTHENON.

they came in first place in a non-existent race...

What?

I think it's pretty clear that a person can't trust any digital photos anymore.

The parthenon's in Greece.
Or was it Grease 2?
i can't keep my movies straight....

[LMNO]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH0aEp1oDOI&feature=player_embedded

Apparently photoshop is now being developed by, literally, wizards.  This shit is amazing.

FUCKING PHOTOSHOP, HOW DOES IT WORK?
                    \

[Cramulus]

I am also confused about how having better tools to edit ruins something about photography

photoshop is for more than photography or fine art


sometimes you need a picture that doesn't have zits or garbage on the ground or whatever, is that "ruining" the photo?

[Triple Zero]

(removed)

[Kai]

HOLY SHIT THEY REPAIRED THE PARTHENON.

they came in first place in a non-existent race...

What?

I think it's pretty clear that a person can't trust any digital photos anymore.

The parthenon's in Greece.
Or was it Grease 2?
i can't keep my movies straight....

Am I wrong about the ancient pillared structure where they repaired the roofline in that youtube? Or did I get it completely wrong?

[Elder Iptuous]

HOLY SHIT THEY REPAIRED THE PARTHENON.

they came in first place in a non-existent race...

What?

I think it's pretty clear that a person can't trust any digital photos anymore.

The parthenon's in Greece.
Or was it Grease 2?
i can't keep my movies straight....

Am I wrong about the ancient pillared structure where they repaired the roofline in that youtube? Or did I get it completely wrong?

When i make mistakes, i use a lot of salt.
salt makes m'steaks taste great...

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I am also confused about how having better tools to edit ruins something about photography

photoshop is for more than photography or fine art


sometimes you need a picture that doesn't have zits or garbage on the ground or whatever, is that "ruining" the photo?

I don't think you read what I wrote. It's not the tool itself, which is neat; it's that the video so well illustrated that ultimately it will enable advertising clients to be even more of unreasonable, demanding douches than they already are.

Also, a beautiful photograph created by Photoshop (the panorama, for instance) to me is far less impressive than a beautiful photograph created by the convergence of the skill of the photographer and the beauty of the subject.

[Elder Iptuous]

if the demands of the clients are now reasonable, and easily accommodated, isn't it a win for designer and douche alike?

[LMNO]

Is there a sliding scale of skill respectability?



I would think that a beautiful end result of a picture that was edited in photoshop would take a lot of skill and aesthetic sense on the part of the 'shopper.  Otherwise, it just looks like a crappy photoshop job.

Is a picture that's been 'shopped somehow less artistic than one that hasn't?