Photographers: for or against using PhotoShop in your work?

To PS or not to PS?panorama 4 objects Shakespeare1 signed

Personally, I LOVE Photoshop, for it is both very powerful and user-friendly software. Its completeness seems without borders, and helps you accomplish miracles 🙂

To make all sorts of transforming/design work, its use is just obvious…but what about just improving your pics? Discussing with photographers I know, I noticed two opposite positions:

1. Yep it is a very good tool and in any case, when you’re a professional or serious amateur :), you have to know about and manage tools of your time

2. Nope it is a kind of cheating…if you’re a good photographer, you have to manage your output directly from your camera…

what do YOU think?

Sources of pics:

  • The Cobbe portrait of William Shakespeare
  • Photoshop transforming: myself

6 thoughts on “Photographers: for or against using PhotoShop in your work?

  1. Each position is relevant depending of what you want to do, what rendering you want and which skills you have in photography and photoshop.

    Personally, I’m bad at photography and I prefer creating pictures more that capturing them.

    By the way, to complete Photoshop (mostly on the creation side), Illustrator is an amazing tool too.


    1. Chacha, thank you for your comment!

      It really depends on your purpose indeed… As far as I am concerned, it took years before I decided to use PS on my pics…was considering it as a kind of compensation for photographer’s weakness.

      Had a discussion recently, and the interlocutor seemed disappointed like “ah, you’re photoshopping your pictures, ok…”The best reply I could find was “yeah but 99% of pictures you see on the Internet / in the press, are PSed as well…we are used to it and will find the “original” picture too insipide”. Kind of defensive answer which made me realize that I am not entirely assuming PS use 🙂


      1. After thinking about the question the whole week, I think that actually there is no shame to have in the Photoshop use. A professional photographer (or at least a very good amateur) would be able to use his environment (light, angle, surrounding …) and the function of his camera to improve his shot. So I don’t see why we could use Photoshop to do so too.
        After that the question is about totally natural pictures vs. Photoshoped or modified through the camera pictures. In the case a photoshoped or modified picture says that it is natural, that cheating.
        In the end the question Between Photoshop and camera modified pictures is, in my opinion, just a question of pride of the artist 😉

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Thanks Chacha, for your reflection and input!

    Visual transforming to improve the quality of a final image,illustration number 1:

    The resulting picture is a typical example of an irrealistic output, as natural body/face proportions are not respected (look at her eyes and neck 🙂 )


  3. Visual transforming to improve the quality of a final image,illustration number 2:
    performed for a video clip of Hungarian singer Boggie.

    Great quality of work, and meaningful clip. Song’ lyrics are cherry on the cake – dare to take a glance at the translation if you don’t currently understand Hungarian 😉


  4. I’m an avid amateur photographer who is beyond excited when taking a photo at the right place and the right time using all the skills the camera and I can offer. I believe in “pure” photograghy and think any photo that is otherwise inhanced should be referred to as photo art.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s