As it’s the 20th anniversary of Photoshop, I’m wondering:

Is photography better off for its creation?

I know it’s made a lot of things more convenient, easier, faster. But has it actually fostered creativity? Moved the medium forward?

I ask sincerely, not as a way of denigrating the program,…

But in all seriousness (srsnss?): Photoshop is great for editing your photos just like a $7000 rolleiflex is for taking photos, but if you don’t have a good photo to start with then it doesn’t matter what software you use. Like anything else, using photoshop doesn’t mean shit if you can’t compose a photo, or don’t have “the eye”. I can’t take a decent polaroid to save my life and you’ve proven beyond any doubt that that has nothing to do with the camera.

1. immaculatecontraception liked this
2. scatterlock answered: It all depends on the photographer. Photoshop doesn’t really hold back creativity, but promotes it. But this is just my opinion
3. kazwashere liked this
4. nirazilla liked this
5. ultralaser answered: everything that makes creativity easier fosters creativity. after than it’s just another tool, like the flash or a zoom lens or tilt-shift.
6. shellygrrl answered: I think, like with cameras, it all depends on who’s using it. One person can use it well; someone else could fudge things up.
7. thatartzygirl answered: Photos, potentially; Photographers; absolutely not. It occured to my friend and I that in the olden days, “photoshop” happened in the camera.
8. sabro answered: It’s a hard question. I use Photoshop but I don’t overuse it. Most people do. I don’t like that.
9. capucha liked this
10. daniellescruggs liked this
11. this-is-ryan reblogged this from louobedlam and added:

    in all seriousness (srsnss?): Photoshop is great for editing your photos just like...$7000...

12. this-is-ryan answered: Photoshop was created on the set of Willow so Lucas could do morphing. All of the shit we use it for today is B/C THEY MADE WILLOW. But yes.
13. modulations liked this
14. modulations reblogged this from louobedlam and added:

    responses. Stuff like “it makes it possible...hipsters to make a good photo by editing it”...

15. modulations answered: As with any new development, it has created both good & bad. Bash all you want, but Loretta Lux and Clark & Pougnaud push boundaries w/ PS.
16. andysayshi reblogged this from louobedlam and added:

    reblogging this to answer your question because...need more than 141 characters to do so,...

17. lauraelise answered: i’m just shocked you use iPhoto for adjustments..?!? i can’t agree with that decision.
18. lightwriter answered: I believe just as the dark room was necessary for b/w and grew over time, so shall digital/ PS. consumerism is what will kill our art.
19. ckburch liked this
20. oati liked this
21. harrigan answered: It’s subjective to the user.. As a photographer I use it seldom, except for organizing, type, or a dyptych. I feel Its over used by (photogs)
22. kianna answered: In things like graphic design, yes. Photo’s them self? No. Sometimes the imperfections are the best part of a photo.
23. krisisisipoo answered: I’m sorry you find reality boring and mundane, especially since it’s really all you’ve got.
24. gotmoxied answered: nope
25. theamazingjosh answered: Absolutely. Would film have progressed without a darkroom?
26. everydayjonhill answered: Did photography ruin painting landscapes? No. But it changed the game, and any game changer creates a need for more creativity.
27. originalmaterial answered: Win Crouwel said, it makes it quicker, not better. It’s “just” a digital darkroom, not all were a fan of solarization when it was on film.
28. javierrivera answered: With every new tool, comes responsibility… It’s bad when you take a photo and say: “F it… I’ll fix it in PS”
29. kevinmosley answered: I don’t have it on my computer. I use Digital Photo Professional for my Canon RAW files. I would say it helps and hinders a lot.
30. moderation answered: Photoshop is a Digital Darkroom. Its just a little easier to manipulate photos.
31. verygoodlooking answered: i believe its truely lowered the standard of handmade arts/craft. in photography its a point and click away from making a shitty photo grand.
32. seanscheidt reblogged this from louobedlam and added:

    photog who is also...painter…it gets rid...mechanical...

33. aaaround liked this
34. tastedwalentz answered: Perhaps it has made art better. But the photo is the actual picture, pre-edit, and the photographer is only as good as the pure shot.
35. seanscheidt answered: its my darkroom for digital, nothing more. While it can do more, its best approached, atleast w photography analogous to the traditional d.r
36. louobedlam posted this