bigwolf40 Loc: Effort, Pa.

I also feel this way....Rich

BudsOwl Loc: Upstate NY and New England

When I send a photo to family or friends, I tend to do as little processing as possible i.e. cropping and exposure correction; but when I submit a photo for sale, or frame it for my own enjoyment, I usually try different photo enhancements until I get something that pleases me (or the potential owner). So use your own judgement.
Bud

bigwolf40 Loc: Effort, Pa.

I agree with both Linda from Maine and you Jim as I feel that photography is a personal thing and you should satisfy your self first....Rich

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

Getting it right in the camera first is a big step in using minimal PP. I come from the film days where the amount of manipulation was very limited compared to today's digital manipulation. The proper use of a light meter is still a solid start, film or digital.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Here's an article that you might find interesting. Much manipulation in the darkroom!

http://petapixel.com/2013/09/12/marked-photographs-show-iconic-prints-edited-darkroom/

-

bcrawf

Charles, don't let it be a "dilemma" for you. Photography is an image-making medium. Just as in the case of painting, a photographic image may be produced so as to be as close as possible (within the ability of the maker) to what was viewed by the maker, but that condition is not what determines whether the image produced (painting or photograph) is a genuine painting or photograph. Every medium does have its technical uses (think of medical illustration drawings or crime-scene photos), but there is an unlimited range of expressive potential beyond that.

Jim Bob

I think people do what makes them happy. Don't you?

alliebess Loc: suburban Philadelphia

And what the eye sees is not always what the camera records. I have no problem with a photographer manipulating his/her image to create his/her own vision. And, as others have said, photographers have been manipulating their images since photography began. It's just easier now.

Dr.Nikon Loc: Honolulu Hawaii

Well........ , let's see ..., I see something I want to take a picture of ... Reason ...to remind me of something ...gives me a copy of a design shape I can use ..ok cell phone camera ... .,that's all I need .. I was at dinner last night and the waiter was an old class mate of mine I hadn't seen in 20 years .., ok ..another cell phone shot ...quality ok all I needed ..

I am driving down the road for example and I see a beautiful sunset ... I crab my point and shoot and done deal .. Image ok ...another man pulls up at the same spot and pulls out a 5200 with a 55mm on it and takes a picture of the same sunset .. Wow .., the shot is better than my old point and shoot ...another person pulls off the road where we are and jumps out with a 7100 ....and an even better lens .. He takes a picture of the same sunset .. Wow .., an even better picture of the same sunset ... Wow .., the same view is getting better .. That's not cheating ..,

Another person comes up to all of us and has a cannon mark III .. Expensive lens and takes a shot of the same sunset ....WOW ...and even better shot ....

Finally this old guy with a D810 24-70 tripod electronic shutter mirror up and electronic trigger shoots the sunset .... Amazing ...,the best picture yet ....

You see ... The same sunset picture keeps getting better and better with the addition of better equipment and dare I say better photographers behind the lens ..
Is that a crime ...no ... Is that unfair to the guy who can only afford the $100 point and shoot ... Or does that point and shoot person cry foul ..," hey. You people had better equipment and were able to take a better picture ..."

Does the D810 person discover later at the photo club where most of the sunset photographers are members .., that the person with the 7100 put his shots into post editing with PS and now has a better shot of the sunset than anyone ...,

The picture and the intent is in the eye of the beholder and the one who took the shot ..most of us can see when some one has PS their pictures .., is that more unfair than the the Guy with The D810. over the old point and shoot ..? .. Because the newer camera and the better quality of the higher priced equipment produced a better picture .., better lenses produce better shots ... Well .., photo programs can produce better pictures .., post editing for those who know how to do it correctly and can afford it .., will always produce a better picture .....what's wrong with a better picture ...

Originally ..., before I had the money and didn't have the fancy cameras and PS / LR etc ...I would take a picture and cry fowl when someone with a better camera and post editing software had taken a better picture .., it was like cheating ....they modified the shot ...now I know better ..

I am amazed at how technology .., be it a better lens .., better camera .., better post editing tools and software can enhance a picture ... Even better than the human Eye can see it ..

Try putting some of Ansel Adams shots into software editing .., see what you get ...An even better picture ...according to me or according to ?? .. Or should they never be edited ... It's all up to the person ...who shoots the shot .., or the one who views the shot ...

When digital photography came along .. Film camera people complained .., now most embrace it ... Technology and photography are moving at light speed and there is no turning back ...the future is anyone's guess .., but you can be sure as time goes by .. Pictures will only get better in detail and quality .... And be able to not only capture what the eye sees ..., but what your imagination beyond what your eye can see .....

flyguy Loc: Las Cruces, New Mexico

I second that!!!

arousey Loc: Morrison, Colorago

I find that these arguments are never ending. I remember when I first began using digital, everyone used to ask if I shot with digital or film. If it was a digital image there was almost a palpable disappointment. Why? Because it must be photoshopped!!! But no one ever asked me if I took my film or negatives into a darkroom and manipulated the processing there to get the most out of a negative. Push or pull the film, double exposure, sandwiching negatives, dodge here, burn there, darken the sky, lighten the foreground, mask this part, selenium, sepia, dye, metal replacement toning, etc.

It's as if digital invented the world of manipulation and so it must be a recent phenomena.

ptcanon3ti Loc: NJ

Art vs journalistic photography. The photog makes the choice and gravitates toward what he/she likes. It's as simple as that.

Art photography = something you'd like to hang on a wall. Journalistic = recording moments, places, things.

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

Thanks Linda, I have seen this before and yes that level of manipulation was possible but only after hours and hours of touchup work had been done. Sometimes days and a lot of it involved rephotographing the negative repeatedly. This was far from the norm and even at that level it's a far cry from today's digital editing capabilities.

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

Granted, film had several possibilities for manipulation but nothing like what software can due today.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

I always do a little PP on my photos, but I also like (actually really enjoy) creating something entirely new, its just a lot of fun!!!