Photoshop or not?

Not as much as mine did typing it. Lol

LOL Peter, it reads brilliant though, you put us all in our place

yes Peter you did and all my brownies good thuogh

Oh, I hope it didnt sound like I was trying to put you all in your place. But it is true about the camera lens verses they eye though. There are so many variables in fucus point, shutter speed and apperture size to take into account. Any one of them changed will alter the resuling photo. By the way, did you know that Einsteins Law of Relativity has a big bearing on flash photography? But please dont ask me to go onto that on here. He he he.

Edited by: Peter Evans at:25th November 2008 17:29

But the brain/eye relationship!! can't be beat!!

no

A few points struck me here about Photoshop and also the human eye. It certainly is true that the camera lens is far more advanced than any film it casts its image on, but the human eye compensates for shadows and sends clear images to the brain unlike the cameras at say a sporting event where half the field is in shadow, the other in bright light. As for editing pictures with Paintshop & Photoshop the aim most of the time for me anyway is to end up with a pleasing image. I suppose it's a bit like a wig in that if you can see the join it just dosen't pass muster. All photographs reflect some aspect of how the taker wants the final result to be seen. With skill editing can produce a better final result but not always. I'm on a learning curve with Photoshop and I am aware that to "overcook" a picture is just as bad as overcooking a good steak.