Is a photo that has been edited for exposure and color tone a photo or artwork?
I started thinking weird thoughts again.😅
Discussion
I think all photos are artwork anyway, it’s just how intense or unique you want to make it.Depending on the camera, settings, film, quality, unique human perception, etc. the same image can be very different without intention. My 2 sats 🤙
I find myself adjusting my photos to suit my preferences. I sometimes wonder whether it's a positive habit or if I should consider refraining from doing so.
‘Auto’ usually sucks and is better when you manually edit it. Professional photographers always have their unique ‘touch’, their perspective of how it should be.
I agree with others, it's both. Editing for exposure doesn't make a photo any less "real", because the incoming light is filtered through the lens glass and interpreted by the CCD or film chemicals in either case.
Thank you very much. I've been struggling with this for a long time. I wondered if my style would be antagonistic.
If you think about it, we're editing our photos before we take them as well as after. We edit the idea, the mood, the story, the angle, the time of day, the weather, the film, the camera settings, the lens, the mirror, the shutter, etc. etc.
Then "click" it's on film. And we edit the negatives with chemicals to develop then, edit them by scanning them, edit them in computer software.
The photograph is a process, and the process from beginning to end is the art. Don't worry, any produce good art with the tools you have. Tell everyone who hates: GFY
