Nothing is new!

•
Faking? … maybe not but certainly adapting/correcting the end result. Digital
tools are more powerful and the fine line is easily crosser over!
 
Well yes, faking. The writer does differentiate between faking and retouching and I think that his comments are still valid today.
 
The difference is then you had to have enormous skill, probably spent days in the darkroom and came out with something unique. Today you hit one button in Instagram/Nik/Photoshop and you have an instant fake that looks like everyone else's! :)
 
To be fair though I think someone with the skill to edit in the likes of Photoshop well is equally as talented as those faking the image 100 years ago. The only difference is that it was more of a hands on task 100 years ago compared to the tools available today but that's just progress/technology.
 
I personally can't be a***d faffing about in PS or similar to obtain an image that is simply fake.

Like most folk, I'll "retouch" but even that get's on my pip.....if the desired result doesn't appear within a few minutes of dust spotting, levelling and sharpening, then tbh I rarely spend more time on the original file / neg......I'd sooner go out and attempt to shoot a similar scene with a view of obtaining the result I want.

Everyone to their own.
 
^^ Getting it right (or as right as possible...) in camera. Couldn't agree more. Hardly applies as well to photojournalism and what not, but hey, I'm sticking to my comfort zone :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top