Quote:
Originally Posted by JAKE4
I disagree with you, editing software is not corruption of the art.The raw picture is just the beginning of the process.The computer is a replacement for the hours spent in the darkroom.
|
Quite agree. Editing software is just an extension of the days in the darkroom. I think Ansel Adams is a good, but not outstanding photographer, quite run of the mill actually - there's heresy for you. His real genius lay as a printer in the darkroom. This is not any different from using Photoshop. If you're not using editing software, or getting your film prints done by hand, then you certainly aren't getting the best out of your pictures.
As for, do you need an SLR? It all depends on what your style/subject matter is. If all you do is casual landscapes, party snaps, and shots of the kids running around in the garden, then I think the answer is a resounding no. If you do studio work, still-life, sports/action, anything that
needs external flash or a rapid response once you've pressed the button, then the answer is a definite yes.
Having said that, there's a wedding snapper I know that supplements his dSLR with a G9 compact for some scenes as he feels it works better.