Wow that’s a beautiful shot… Is it photoshopped?

This is a question I probably get asked more often than any other (except the what camera do you use question) when someone sees a picture like the one in the cover above. And It’s a question that exasperates me more than most others. This is because, there exists today, a broad perception that working on an image in post, commonly referred to now as ‘photoshopping’, is in a way, cheating with photography and partly because there seems to be a misplaced belief that using post processing software makes you less of a photographer.

Yes, I do process my images, (incidentally I use Lightroom, not Photoshop). Photographers have been doing it forever, only today it is done on the computer and not in a darkroom. Pretty much all the photos that I show (and for that matter most of the better photos you see on the internet) have had some degree of work done on them and quite honestly if you want to get the best out of your images you need to do some amount of work in post. At this point it’s important to point out that most professional photographers shoot RAW, which is an unprocessed image format which captures the pure sensor output without any enhancements. RAW images are akin to the film of heydays, and so they need to be developed or processed to brings out colours, contrast, detail etc. and produce a complete image. Please shoot RAW (all DSLRs support RAW) if you want the leeway to create the best looking images later, it makes a big difference. Incidentally the JPEGS that your camera turns out are not ‘untouched’, but are in fact processed in camera by the software algorithms of the camera maker, to tweak things like contrast and colour to make the image look more attractive. Thus the idea that you captured what you did ‘in-camera’ without applying any tweaks to enhance an image is a fallacy that most people don’t realize. By shooting RAW and doing your own post processing you are simply retaining control over what edits you incorporate and how your final image looks, rather than giving that control to the camera maker. Try checking out the native RAW image output of your camera to see what the camera actually produces and then compare that to the JPEG output and you will know what I mean.

Bear in mind that what *most* photographers will do in Lightroom / Photoshop / other editing programs is try and mimic what they believe is an accurate representation of what they saw and also felt when they made an image. This is what I have always tried to do. Of course photographers will also add additional vibrancy, colour or contrast to enhance images and make them more pleasing and stand out or even to create a certain ‘look’ or ‘mood’. These are all acceptable enhancements when undertaken within reason and are today considered an integral part of the creative process. (I’ll come back to what within reason might be). This is because digital cameras today, including the fanciest full frame ones simply cannot capture the range and colours that the human eye can see. So most images out of the camera tend to look muted and flat.

Ever try taking a photo of yourself against a sunset? You’ll mostly likely get either get a washed out sky with a properly exposed image of you, or a beautiful vibrant sunset with you as a dark silhouette. This is because the camera’s sensor is simply unable to perceive and capture the range of light from shadows (the darkest part of the scene) to highlights (the brightest parts of the scene) the way your eye does with both the person and the sunset correctly exposed. This is where post processing comes in, to lift the shadows a bit to show the person and bring down the highlights to show the sunset, thus bringing the entire scene closer to reality and not further away from it. Post processing is also used to crop the image to make the overall composition compelling, make that washed out sky a little bluer and the grass a less dull green or sharpen up the details and tweak the contrast a bit to make the overall image more appealing. Converting an image to black and white or a sepia tone is another simple example of this. It’s obviously not what you saw but you may still do it because it gives the image a certain feel that goes well with the content or setting of said image. Post processing is used to ‘finish’ the image, to make it a more complete version of itself. To tell the story that you want to tell. That’s part of the the creative process that starts in the camera and ends on your computer (or in the darkroom).

When I try to explain this I sometimes get this sceptical look which says, ‘maybe, but I’m not sure I totally buy this’. And if the conversation is with someone who has an interest in photography and travel and has not lived under a rock for the last year, it often comes around to the Steve McCurry question. For those of you that didn’t come across the story, some images of Steve McCurry, the legendary travel photographer and one-time photojournalist (incidentally he refers to himself as a visual storyteller now) were found to be digitally altered, where in certain photos objects were actually removed from the frame to help the composition work better. Recently news agency Reuters mandated the use of only jpeg images with minimal editing for photojournalist on the field to ensure quicker turnaround time for filing of stories, as well as to check the proliferation of over enhanced or ‘unethically edited’ images.

So the question that invariably comes up is – where do you draw the line? What is considered an acceptable amount of work in post and what is not. In the end it’s up to each photographer to define their own limits of what they find acceptable. There are some incredibly creative and talented photographers and digital artists out there who can seamlessly blend and compose images using the photograph created in camera as a canvas and then work on it to create a dramatically different image. And that’s fine, as long as it’s made clear to the viewer that they are viewing a digital creation, and not perhaps something that was captured in the moment so to speak.

My own principle, the line which I am comfortable with, and one which has evolved over time, is that post stops when it begins to alter reality, This could be as simple as changing the hues to make a blue sunset pink, or as drastic as adding or removing elements from the photo to make it more visually pleasing. I don’t believe the use of post processing techniques is something to be looked down upon and I would actively encourage anyone who is serious about shooting to develop some skills in that area, however the problem is when the post process is used to ‘create’ rather than enhance or complete an image.

Yes, I do ‘photoshop’ my images , so that, what you see here, is the image I saw through my eyes. The multi hued sunsets we experienced, and the shades of green we perceived when driving around the hills. I try and capture the feel of a place to bring back just a tiny little bit of the beauty we experienced on our travels.

PS: If anybody has any question about how we work on our images or anything else photography related, feel free to shoot us a question in the comments below. You can also  email us on therediscoveryproject@gmail.com