I'm having an argument with my brother about photography now, and I know I'm right on this. If you take a photo with a digital camera, aren't you supposed to add effects to the dull parts so it looks better? Because I've seen alot of photographs by professional photographers, and all of them had effects, and I think they would look like crap without them.

For me a camera is to keep a memory. For artistic purposes its the artists choice as to wether s/he relies on the scene or adds in modifications.

It depends on the picture. If it's a dull picture, you might have to brighten it up with effects and whatnot, but other than that, it's possible to have beautiful effect-less photography. It all depends on the photo, IMO. And if you really think about it, if you think that without the effects they'd look like crap, than that person is not a very good photographer, now is he?

And like HanTony said, pictures are meant to keep memories. Sometimes it doesn't have the same beauty when you make it to be more of a false memory.

Usually, though, for professional photography, yes, they use effects. But then again, it's not that much about "memories" when it comes to professional photography.

I totally agree that you don't need effects on pics meant for memories, since it can make a false memory sometimes. I was wondering because my brother is trying to get into the performing/visual arts school I go to for photography.

for truly amazing photography I think the only modifying I like are color correction (to make it more like the actual phenomenon/situation) and cropping.

The rest while entertaining/fun doesn't mean its a good picture...good pictures should be taken not made.

for truly amazing photography I think the only modifying I like are color correction (to make it more like the actual phenomenon/situation) and cropping.

The rest while entertaining/fun doesn't mean its a good picture...good pictures should be taken not made.

I agree.

for truly amazing photography I think the only modifying I like are color correction (to make it more like the actual phenomenon/situation) and cropping.

The rest while entertaining/fun doesn't mean its a good picture...good pictures should be taken not made.
I agree with that. Depends on what it is for. It's more amazing when it's real, though.

I agree, but if you want to show emphasis on something, you should add an effect to it, right? I saw this really cool photo of motorcycle on deviantart where someone took a pic of someone on a motorcycle and blurred everything behind the rider, so I was just thinking that could be applied to alot of photos.

As a good photogrpher you should be able to do that yourself (putting and emphasis on something). But I suppose it depends on your style.

You don't have to add effects, but it is sometimes better if you do.
Though with the right equipment (lenses etc.), camera, settings, lighting etc. you can get a perfect shot that shouldn't need correcting.
I usually like to keep the shot as real as possible, if I'm going to change the colours for a more surreal look, I'd go all the way and make it officially a photo manipulation.

I'm an amatuer photographer and I believe that some pictures are beautiful if you leave them the way they are.

that's not the case with others. Sometimes, you're just not in the right light, so using photoshop can clear things up. it just depends on the picture actually.

you can see my photos at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/92231757@N00/

enjoy

Those are some nice photos! Although I think you could've used effects to light up the living room pic. It looked a little dark.

Yeah, I would like to do some photomanips with my own pictures, but our camera never works, and my parents suck at technology period.

Gah.

And like HanTony said, pictures are meant to keep memories. Sometimes it doesn't have the same beauty when you make it to be more of a false memory.


Usually you aren't using effects in photography to make it more *fake* looking. The fact of the matter is, a lot of times, things look different to cameras than to human eyes. When this happens, it is correct to use effects to compensate for that. My aunt doesn't have red eyes. My backyard isn't tinted blue. My eyes know that, but cameras often don't. In those cases, you should use effects to capture the memory correctly. :)

I think that's what the original poster was saying, not "OMG WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ADD FIRE TO PEOPLE'S EYES AND LIGHTNING IN THE BACKGROUND RIGHT?!?!?!?" :lol:

So to the original poster: The answer to your question is "yes."
Haha. :3

Yes, thats what I was asking. :heh: I guess I was asking it the wrong way. :lol:

...

zippy! thanks for comment! yea i was trying to create an effect with the darkness of the living room but it guess it turned out wrong XD

Mmm double post..

Your photos are pretty nice. They looks like stock images. They're better than mine, at any rate. I don't do much anymore, partially because I don't own my own camera, I have to steal one off someone else and make it magically reappear later borrow my parents' camera. The camera I want costs like $500 USD and on top of that I want a bumch of lenses and filters..

It's a fact. I'm dirt poor.

Your photos are pretty nice. They looks like stock images.

im sorry but what does "stock images" mean?

nefer...great images...the fact that the first page actualy made me hungry speaks for itself.

BTW you look alot younger in that first pic O_o

Stock images. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_photography)

You're probably thinking wtf since it's not like stock images have a definite style, it's just a lot of them look like that: Close-ups/macros on everyday objects. But, oh! The look nice! Not trying to be critical or anything.

Edit: Fixed the link. My brain was obviously working at half power, I mixed two different codes together!!

haha, Siul1313, you can call me Kimi. I look a lot younger in that pic? You mean, I look a lot younger than 18? that picture was taken on nov. 4, 2006, 7 days before my 18th birthday.

and methodx, thanks for the definition. Not to worry. I enjoy criticism. It helps me become better. Thanks again.

Well I woulda guessed you were 16 tops, second one (first on second page) you look alot more your age.

BTW..thread jacking FTW! XD

That awful sound... and the shaking... was that a blast of wind, from an explosion?

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/5946/dscn9438gx2.jpg

War was an abstract thing, nothing more than a show on TV, until that final day of summer...

The funny thing is, that's actually a really pretty picture. If you told me it was the sun rising on a foggy morning, I'd believe you. O: