Of course they would if the exif was intact.

I certainly dont agree with that! Setting up a shot to take the picture to you best ability is what photography is all about!! KNOWING what you are doing, understanding the camera, the settings and what effects they will have has always been to me what its about, not sure where you are coming from on that one Mande?

If you want to photoshop your pictures fine, and if thats how YOU see photography thats fine too, I dont agree.
Dawn.

It really depends what each person sees as photography.

To some it might be an accurate snapshot of what you saw yourself (is that actually possible??!)
To some it is an image of what you saw but enhanced either by photography itself or PP.

If 'purists' want to be pedantic then they shouldn't be turning out pics with bokeh, black n white - because your eye would never really see that in natural circumstances. Same as fish eye lens etc

It really is no right or wrong answer beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and it will boil down to what people want from their photographs, and what they like or find appealing in other peoples.

I think what Mande means (and I know she will correct me if I am wrong ) is that a *good* photographer has to SEE the picture first , in order to get it A lot of people know all there is to know about their cameras, about lighting and all sorts of things ..but they can't take a good photo (and this is NOT directed at anyone on here, this is a general statement )

Just to be different, I actually don't consider the term 'making a photograph' to be one associated with PP. I see making a photograph as deciding on the compsition of your shot, adjusting the settings, deciding on the aperture etc as oppose to just pointing the camera at something and shooting in Auto mode (taking a photo).

Although having said that I agree with your sentiments

Now this is where I consider shots straight from the camera (with little or no PP) to be photographs - the rest I would actually term pictures. They are no longer photos as they have been heavily manipulated.

Interesting comment Azz and not one I actually agree with. Just because people don't edit their shots doesn't mean they can't, often time is a limiting factor.

Sorry but I don't agree with this, a good photographer is one who can 'see' the ideal composition for a shot (or even from a unique perspective) and also knows their tools, knows how the settings work and what they need to change to get the desired effect.

Hi Mel.
Yes I agree you need to "see" the photograph (I see photographs everywhere I look now) But often I can get the composition correct, the exposure, lighting etc.. right, but some part maybe OOF, and its crap! I wouldnt try to correct this, id scrap it.

Maybe this will help you see what I mean.

I took this photo of a clients Dog.


KK, did this to it and said you can "play" with it and do much more. If I had given KK's picture to my client they would of been horrified, its completely different, thats what I mean by "making" the picture as opposed to the one that was taken. Theres nothing wrong with what KK did, i am pleased she did, to show what can be done, but I hope by seeing the two pictures you can see what I mean.
dawn.

Whilst I think everyone is entitled to their particular view, I find it amusing that the folks who bring the subject up are, more often than not, the people who don't edit their pics much. It seems that the people who can (not necessarily DO) edit some of their pics heavily are quite happy to accept either version of someone elses photos ...

I still think that there is no right or wrong about it ...some pics I take are fine as they are ..some can be improved...and still others are fine as they are but I want to see what I can do with them ..Art!!

You may as well argue that a painting HAS to be what the artist sees...so let's decry all Picaso's surreal cubism and Blue Period pics ...

Thats a bit unfair Mel, and I dont find it "amusing." The reason why I dont photoshop my pics is (and others) because I dont want to, I can accept that, why cant you? I accept that everyone has a choice, I have already said I rarely comment on PS stuff because I dont like it, I could go on every thread and say, "that picture is ruined" or whatever, but I dont because I appreciate that for those that like it its good stuff, Im happy with that!Dawn.

Hey, is this our first YoP debate???

Dawn,
I'm a professional broadcast cameraman to trade, and believe me, there is a lot more involved in setting up a broadcast camera, as opposed to an SLR.
I know plenty of other professional camera ops too, all of which know full well how to set up a camera and lights etc for a shoot...but if we were all tasked with filming a certain thing...I don't know, lets say...a day at the zoo...despite each of us being professionally trained camera operators, having full working knowledge of our equipment, I would bet my mortgage on the fact that, some of the shots from one person, would be way better than that of another.
How can this be true, if by going with your suggestion Dawn, that all you simply need, is to know how your camera works, and understand your surroundings?
Why would so many of the shots differ despite us all having the same knowledge??

My point is this...simply knowing how to work a camera and set up a shoot, doesn't actually mean that you're a good photographer. All it means is that you have an understanding of how your kit works, and an idea of what should make a nice photograph.
It's what you then do with this knowledge that makes the picture.

And just to go back to the exif point you made.
If I was hired to do a shoot, be it portrait, weddings, reportagé, sports...whatever...do you really think the client gives a hoot about wether or not the date, time, image size etc is still intact?

And why would your client have been horrified! That's quite a strong worded statement, and a bit of an insult to KK, despite claiming to be " pleased she did, to show what can be done "

If i had a choice between scrapping a photo and telling the client I need to re-shoot because the photo i took wasn't good enough, or fixing it in photoshop, as KK has shown (although the dog colours are a little "too" different), I'd photoshop anyday....

Look at any photography mag cover. They're all edited in some way... And they're good photographers.