civilized ku # 82 ~ lost and confused?
Monday, April 28, 2008 at 07:52AM 
Just relaxing • click to embiggenLate afternoon, this past Saturday, while I was sitting around relaxing after a nice day with the wife and Hugo, I was suddenly struck by a thought that leads directly to a question for you.
I have previously ruminated and ranted about the state of affairs in the photo world of digital cameras / capture. My previous opinion still stands - that the digital capture world is one fine "immature" mess, in no small part because it is a picture-perfect model of planned obsolescence. Today's "state of the art" is tomorrow's (almost literally) has been.
But one thing that has remained relatively constant is the digital darkroom, aka Photoshop. Make no mistake, PS has evolved over the years with more tools, versatility, and complexity. But, for many photographers, its core capabilities are remarkably constant simply because so many of PS's tools so closely match traditional analog photo and pre-press techniques.
That is why I was able, without too much hair pulling, to jump into PS very early on and take to it like a fish to water - I had experience aplenty in the wet darkroom - color and BW - as well a considerable amount of pre-press knowledge from my commercial photography experience where putting an image on paper on a printing press was the goal of the process.
That said, on Saturday I was struck. with a clarity I had not experienced before, that, DUH, not everyone has had experience like mine. The younger generation of photographers have never experienced the wet darkroom and, relatively speaking, only a handful of photographers have faced the rigorous demands of working with a printer to achieve high quality press output.
So, for whatever reason, on Saturday I had a vision of hordes of bewildered "newbies" wandering around, dazed and confused, in the digital darkroom - many of whom must truly feel that they are "in the dark". With so much of the final picture quality dependent upon the knowledgeable and expert use of some kind of imaging making software, I was left wondering about how many out there are feeling dazed and confused to one degree or another.
I was also left wondering about how many out there even use PS - the acknowledged leader in imaging making/editing software. Do people avoid it because of its expense and/or its seemingly confusing complexity? Or, if you do use it, are you intimidated by the seemingly infinite number of tools and variations thereof? Do you feel that your pictures could be much "better" if only you were better at using PS (or some other software)?
I have never had this conversation before and I am very curious about these issues.
Reader Comments (11)
After years of using PHotoShop, I'm just coming to feel that I have some degree of control. I was a B&W printer in the wet darkroom but managing color and printing with ink jet printers has taken some time. Every new edition of PS and every new printer, ink, and paper brings challenges. Maybe it will keep my brain functioning while I grow older.
I feel like my images could be so much better if I were better at PS. I've only been photographing for three years (hence no wet darkroom experience), and avoided PS for the first two. I used Elements. I hardly ever feel that I've produced the image that could be after I've worked on it. I don't think they're terrible, but they could be so much better.
Not really. My photos could be better but the issue is not how good or bad I am at photoshop but rather how much experience I've had looking at and working with images. Once I know what I want to do it's really not a big deal to just dive in and try it out or (gasp) read the * manual or do a web search and find out how to do it --it's the deciding what I want to do that is hard.
Speaking as one who teaches both darkroom and digital, I agree that those who have been through the demands of the silver print make better use of Photoshop. Not to say that I haven't had students who do well without previous darkroom experience, but I tend to think they are the exception. Part of that may be my teaching methods in that I spent a good bit of the last century within the confines of "la chambre noir" I also agree that PS's core has remained very constant for the bits and pieces of it that I use to make my images. At first, back in the 90's, I rejected PS because of price, and started my digital messings with Paint Shop Pro. Then someone gave me a copy of PS 5 and wondered why I was so resistant to move into the mainstream. I can't imagine using anything else. I think for me, I use maybe 10% of what PS is capable of, but I think that is probably true of most photographers who do digital capture and want to make good prints on an ink jet printer. The ol' P'taker
Been taking pictures for around 35 years..... digitally for 7..... no wet darkroom experience but 25 years on a computer of some sort..... Started with PS Elements on to CS and now using CS3. I'm just now starting to get comfortable with most of PS's capability and it's daunting to say the least... It's the old adage"just because you can , doesn't mean you should" that I fight...... getting a well composed and exposed photo in the camera is 4/5's the battle..... 1/5 in PS trying to decide how to interpret it properly ...
I came at photography somewhat backwards, via a masters degree in image processing and a phd that involved designing bits and pieces of accelerators for Photoshop filters, amongst other things.
I've never been in a darkroom. Never really shot film. (though I'd love to try out darkroom work some day) So the photography aspects were harder than the digital darkroom for me to pick up.
I started out in the darkroom with B&W. I never learned color processing. I've been using PS since v.2. I've always found PS fun, never intimidating. Having done some work as an illustrator in the Army (doing it all by hand), I was thrilled to be able to do some of that on the computer! I've never looked back.
I think darkroom experience is the best preparation for computer processing, though it can certainly be learned from scratch. I used PS in former days doing scientific image processing, but I'm happier now with the far cheaper Picture Window Pro.
Thanks to the blog community, I was also able to relax and enjoy a beer and Vanity Fair, instead of listening to dear blovius explore this train of thought...I owe you!
I dabbled in a wet darkroom for a few years and I loved the experience, but for one reason or another never got very good at it. I was a lousy color printer and that frustration pretty much caused me to abandon the darkroom and quit photography, other than family stuff, for quite awhile. Then came Photoshop, digital cameras and I've never looked back. I don't think the software has done anything per se to make me a better photographer, a better "seer", but, as a set of tools that helps refine the creativity....well, I just can't imagine life without it. As much as I enjoyed the feeling of closing the door and hiding away in my little darkroom, I have grown to really love closing the door to my den and coaxing cool stuff out of RAW files. It's taken me about 8-10 years but I think I can finally say that I'm very comfortable with Photoshop now. It did intimidate me at first. The whole digital thing intimidated me at first! I stuck with it and I love it.
Dear "the wife"
Whenever my wife and I entertain or are being entertained, she always declares and "pixel free zoner" where nothing related to digital photography can be discussed, or even hinted at, period.