docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

Gonate, brings up an issue I have been struggling with for some time. I am fairly new to photography and try to take the most technically correct and expressive pictures I can. I don't own any post processing software but rely on what I can make happen with my camera. I know it takes a certain amount of skill to pp a picture but what about the art of taking picture that needs no processing. I guess I'll never make it as an enthusiastic amateur. Oh well.[/quote]

I would say that both skills are required for most of us. And
as always there will be a few who just see the world in such imaginative, provocative, unique and beautiful ways that only minimal processing is required. Most of us will need to learn and master the craft of image processing as well.

I believe that it is crucial at some point for anyone who is serious about what they are doing with the camera to learn how to be as creative and skillful as possible with their camera - and their lenses. Know all the rules and be free to break them - understand exposure intimately then toss out all your concepts of exposure.

For me, what I do in the field greatly dictates what and how I proceed in the digital darkroom......and conversely as my digital darkroom skills grow what i can start to imagine in the field likewise grows.

Its not either/or.....

glojo Loc: South Devon, England

Folks will be telling me next that so called 'models' do not plaster themselves in make-up or use lighting to hide or exaggerate certain points of their body.. Corsets, brassieres, tights or stockings are all 'aids' to hide, alter enhance shapes or colours to the body.. Live and let live, enjoy what you enjoy and respect to everyone

steve40 Loc: Asheville/Canton, NC, USA

Well that is not what you call post processing, but pre-processing, or just plain hiding the truth. :)

I think one should strive to make images that need as little PP, as possible. But most have become like the drug addict, that can't get by without it. Basically PhotoShop has created a lot of "sloppy snappers", who knowing they can hide all their mistakes. Take more pride in their photo-art, than any real abilities. Like the aforementioned skin models.

glojo Loc: South Devon, England

I am not sure that is what raw is about.. JPEG has done your 'photoshopping' for you without you having ANY say in the matter. :thumbup:

As has been said already, in the good old days of film and the trusty old dark room there was still lots of work that was done to get the best results although I only ever dabbled in black and white developing

docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

i think one can strive to be as creative as they can - using both camera tools and processing tools. I think comparing digital photography to film days is like comparing a horse to a Porsche - and the same with digital work. The kinds of images a film based guy like Uelsmann creates, which require multiple enlargers and exquisite attention to registration, and precision are skills very few people can learn in the darkroom - but with photoshop they can approximate or surpass.

I think it requires as much skill as it did in the "good old" days to work skillfully, creatively, and masterfully with photoshop as it ever did with masks, chemicals, and burning tools.

PhotoArtsLA Loc: Boynton Beach

Photography is not dying, but buying a high end digital camera does not make you a photographer. Not so ironically, there are many first time "pro photographers" with business cards and no more skill than their high end digital camera on AUTO or PROGRAM provides. This chips awaay at the concept of what is a professional. And it is everywhere.

gonate Loc: sacramento,calif

Very true PhotoArtsLA, It can be said Selling a few 3rd rate 4 by 6 photo's for 1$ and claim to be a pro. photographer. That does chip away what is a pro photographer.

glojo Loc: South Devon, England

Is a professional photographer someone that sells photographs?

Unfortunately or fortunately the age of the digital camera has bought photography to the masses and that is something we all have to accept.

What is a good photograph?

Is it a woman plastered in make-up and ordered to take up a set pose whilst floodlight or is it an F-15E fighter aircraft skimming the ground and every detail of the aircraft being pin sharp?

Who decides what is or is not good or bad?

What is a photograph (there is far more to that question than meets the eye)

Are some folks trying to insinuate there is some form of snobbery regarding the taking of pictures?

Please note I am simply asking questions and I am a mere 'snapper'

steve40 Loc: Asheville/Canton, NC, USA

professional used to be associated with someone who sold, and made money from their services. Usually also someone who spent a period of time under a tutor, or obtaining an eduction/training equivalent to the same.

Anymore Not So!, now its anyone who deems themselves professional; by reason of their vanities. Which is a blot to any profession they pursue, and brings criticism to those who by hard work, and training are professionals.

There should be no snobbery among photographers of any level, but there should be a much clearer distinction; when using the word PRO.