Photoshop or Not?

[Terry Runion]

Do you think photography should remain pure? or Do you think Photoshop has a required place in Photography?

[Alexander Boriqua]

Photographers have been subtly manipulating photos almost since photography began. I think photoshop is just another tool and still needs an artist to draw the best results from it. I don't think it makes a bad photo a good one. Bad photo is bad photo. but used correctly ... hell yea use photoshop.
Alex

[Jacqueline Hanna Photography]

There is a difference between getting it right in the camera the first time around, and enhancing an image with photoshop. i love the ability to saturate certain photos with color, make a photo more dramatic by making it black and white, or making a woman appear younger by removing lines and wrinkles. photoshop provides so many opportunities to make an already good image into something even more.

[Jeff]

What is pure photography? Even in B&W film photography there was everything from subtle to extreme manipulation going on. Digital is an extension of that tradition in an altered form. There are more tricks you can do, and manipulation is simpler. But as long as you acknowledge that there was manipulation, there shouldn't be a problem. Photoshop also let's you explore your creativity as a visual artist. This photo was originally a color capture, but playing around in photoshop let me create this image which is quite pleasing to me.

[Michael Carr]

Ansel Adams did most of his work in the darkroom, which is what photoshop is a digital darkroom. So yes, learn how to use photoshop to make you a better photographer.

[Terry Runion]

I will have to say, I am from the darkroom days, and like Michael stated, we used to do allot of dodging , burning and other tricks in the darkroom. Photoshop has actually just made that allot easier to do, and I for one would have to say I love that. Not to mention the chemicals in the photographic process are toxic, and used allot of sliver for black and white, so if you think about it, Photoshop has made the Photography industry much "greener".

Besides without Photoshop I could not do the image below( well actually Irina at Retouching Ave did this one):

[Joe Barney]

Hey, how about those of us on a linux-type operating system? I'm stuck with GIMP currently. I don't believe it should always be pure, but it depends. Some of my photos look better untouched but I don't have much experience touching them up anyhow. Some photos do look better touched up from what I've seen from others though. They look really good and I've got a friend on flickr that has some awesome talent that touches up her photos. She's amazing.

[Terry Runion]

Is Gimp like a Photoshop alternative?

[Joe Barney]

Yup, it's almost like a "Free clone" but it's not as feature rich. It's what the linux geeks call "open source" and it's decent for being free, but I'd much rather have Photoshop. It's kind of hard to use for me anyhow. I bet Photoshop is easier.

[Rick Polston]

I have both and found that photoshop is more user friendly. I think it has a place in photography. It's no different than enhancing photos in a darkroom other than not having to deal with a projector and chemicals in the dark.

[Terry Runion]

I read somewhere that Adobe is developing an online version of photoshop, you might want to check their site to see if that is out now.

[Jeannie B.]

I agree that since the beginning of time, photos have been manipulated so this is just the modern era of enhancement. It's all art. It actually just levels the playing field for more photographers and with all the cropping, color adjustment, contrast adjustments, focus improvement I do think one can take a mediocre photograph and notch it up quite a bit.

[Shelly Greer]

I think Photoshop is a great complimenting tool for photographers. But all the photoshopping in the world won't help if you are starting with a bad photo. Start with a good photograph, add some good photoshop enhancements and you can have an incredible final product.