Is photoshop adding things that are not there in the picture?
Is "edit" just changing the vibrance, color, contrast, saturation, etc without adding anything else?
Is it okay to call a picture photoshoped when the contrast, vibrance, etc, was changed?
I have so much questions in my head. Thanks for reading.
To my knowledge photoshop can both change the vibrance, colour etc. and put things in one picture from another, add layers, colours, forms, signs and writing. Photoshoped to me would be every picture that has been altered through photoshop. Don't know what the professionals on here would say about that, though :)
Photoshop is an editing tool so edited and photoshopped is the same thing. Of course you don't have to use Photoshop to edit your photo as there are many other editing tools/programmes out there.
Different folks'll chime in with different answers for sure, but being objective, there's a difference between altering the artistic look of a photo and adding in new things to it (or taking away things from it).
I would not class altering the colour/contrast/etc as photoshopping, regardless of whether it was done in photoshop or not. I'd only class actual altering of the components of the image photoshopping. If you take out an object you don't like, or add in one you do, that's shooping.
A grey area based on this definition arises with "airbrushing" of skin tones, as found in every "celebrity" magazine ever. It's kinda 50/50 whether this constitutes shooping. I guess it might depend on the context of the photo.
So, yeah, the part I don't count as shooping, I'd just term processed. Altering the colours/levels/contrast/whatever is merely processing the photo; taking what's there and maximising the look of it.
The term "photoshopped" is used more to imply alterations have been made beyond the standard basic editing like tweeking the color and contrast or cropping. Even though basic editing can be done in Photoshop, the term is not generally used in this context.
"A grey area based on this definition arises with "airbrushing" of skin tones, as found in every "celebrity" magazine ever. It's kinda 50/50 whether this constitutes shooping. I guess it might depend on the context of the photo."
@eyebrows --- Airbrushing is altering the photo and therefore photoshopped. That doesn't mean it's wrong to do but the term most definately applies.
@dmortega yeah I'll roll with that. I can see a difference between that and more general photoshoppery but it's a hard one to put into words so I'll collapse it :p
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
I would not class altering the colour/contrast/etc as photoshopping, regardless of whether it was done in photoshop or not. I'd only class actual altering of the components of the image photoshopping. If you take out an object you don't like, or add in one you do, that's shooping.
A grey area based on this definition arises with "airbrushing" of skin tones, as found in every "celebrity" magazine ever. It's kinda 50/50 whether this constitutes shooping. I guess it might depend on the context of the photo.
@eyebrows --- Airbrushing is altering the photo and therefore photoshopped. That doesn't mean it's wrong to do but the term most definately applies.