You can’t be creative in Photoshop?
by Mark ~ March 10th, 2007. Filed under: Photoshop Tips, Visit-worthy links, abstracts, art, nature photography, philosophy, software, technique.Howard Grill took on some interesting discussion about an article in the recent Camera Arts magazine. So visit Howard’s blog and read the article link he has. If anything, it is certainly a different point of view whether you choose to agree or disagree. I don’t know if the author was intentionally trying to be controversial to stimulate discussion (which could be very possible), on just a crusade against the industry ‘obsession’ with this software, or there is some overall message I am missing. But what particular quote from the article I found interesting.
“Creativity is in the person first, the world second, and in Photoshop, not at all.”
I think the author was trying to push the idea that if the photographer isn’t creative when first snapping the shutter, doing work in Photoshop later isn’t going to add anything to the process. Or I could be misunderstanding - because certainly the program by itself doesn’t make someone creative - it is simply another tool for an artist to use. The program doesn’t act without a driver behind the wheel. But certainly with the amount of tools available to someone using the program, the millions of tips and techniques to be found, perhaps someone could be inspired by trying different things they might not have without the tools at their disposal.
The program is used to varying degrees depending on the individual and what they ultimately want the final work to look like. I really don’t see much difference in someone who may spend hours tweaking in a darkroom playing with different processes to acheive different effects, or if someone spends the time in front of a computer getting the same results. Photoshop is the modern darkroom. And now programs like Lightroom are also adding to the tools available to us.
Is it a case of being stuck in older, thought to be ‘purer’ ways? Is it resistance against technology? I recall many such discussions when digital cameras were first appearing on the market - that they really didn’t produce real photographs, could never be ‘35 film equivalent’ until we had 23 MP cameras. Some things I suppose I just don’t understand. You can either embrace what is available to you, or leave it alone - it is your choice. The preachy type articles just don’t sit well with me I guess.
March 11th, 2007 at
Hey Mark,
I read the Howard Grill post, very interesting. I am still in the stone ages when it comes to photoshop, I process my images using Elements 2.0 and got it free with my first printer. I find it has all the tools I need with this program and am happy with the way my images look. I just recently bought Elements 4.0, but have gone back to 2.0. I haven’t got caught up in buying every upgrade as it comes out or upgrading to the photoshop programs like CS2 yet. I agree that these are just enhancing tools and in no way help in your creativity skill, but it does add more tools for someone who is creative to go crazy. I love all the technology and have no problem with those who use it to its full potential.
March 11th, 2007 at
Hey Mike -
I think there is a lot to be said for keeping things simple. It is one of the great appeals of Lightroom - where you can process a lot of images the same way quite easily. I did all the leaf images I shot today in Lightroom only. Once I tweaked one image to the contrast and color I liked, I copied those settings over to the other compositions.
It is an exciting time to be a photographer I think.
April 12th, 2007 at
Photoshop CS3 was published and available now. Did you try it? Got any new exciting features?
April 12th, 2007 at
John, no I have not. I have read a few things , and saw some tutorials about the beta, but haven’t played with it myself. I will likely upgrade.
December 13th, 2007 at
I just thought of something - if photography WASN’T about the new advancements in technology - wouldn’t we all still be shooting with daguerreotype cameras?
To me - photography has ALWAYS been about its evolution. There are some out there that might grow very fond of a particular style or method, and that’s just fine. The rest of us who care to move on should be able to do so without judgment either…
July 22nd, 2008 at
I agree and disagree with Mr. Grill…the idea of the photographer getting it right when he snaps the camera is right on I think because you can only make a bad image look so much better using Photoshop or any other graphics software…and on the other side of that, you can make a great image look awesome using Photoshop. Using Photoshop doesn’t make you creative really…figuring out how to use the program does!! I remember pulling some hairs and swearing quite a bit when I was learning.
You really can get creative with Photoshop once you learn your way around the program itself…there are so many ways to do the same thing and each resulting in something completely different…that’s my 2 cents!
August 18th, 2008 at
I’ve read the article and I just don’t get his beef. In my mind you cannot press a button and capture an image from nature and claim to be any more pure than someone clicking a mouse.
I also disagree with his order. “Creativity is in the person first, the world second, and in Photoshop, not at all.” I think true creativity is ignoring the self and paying full attention to the world. To me, the greatest artists are the people who pay the most attention.