More and more now I'm hearing people in the industry use the word "treatment" when describing the photographer's final piece: "I wonder what treatment or filter he used", or "I love that kind of treatment". The workflow a photographer chooses determines how the final, stylized photograph will render.
Phase One's Capture One Pro for instance, processes RAW images completely differently than the way Adobe products process them. In addition, the process through which images are retouched or stylized, be it from (what I like to call) scratch, where one uses only native Photoshop adjustment layers and filters to achieve a stylized effect, or with the help of 3rd-party plugins such as Kevin Kubota's toolkit, the modern-day photographer appears to be slacking on scrutiny: doing less and less in production, and relying on the magic of digital imaging software. So does that mean that retouchers should get paid more, and or at least get credited? Do Photoshop skills alleviate the need to be a "great" photographer? Do they eliminate the need for superior lighting?
Adam,
ReplyDeleteI guess I've gone back the other way. I look to get it how I want it S.O.C. Remember? Like when you shot film? Sure you could dodge/burn/superimpose, but then what.
Maybe I'm just old and old school a bit? I just prefer to spend less time at the computer and more time behind the camera/marketing/having fun...