I’ve created an online art portfolio and, of course, images are extremely important in displaying my work. Part of the work I’m displaying is photography. I think that there’s an art in photography as well as a sort of art in editing. While I could easily manipulate a photograph to remove people in the background, erase blemishes, or appear sunnier, I like the rawness of an un-edited photograph.
This isn’t to say that I haven’t edited the photos on my page, because sometimes the lighting wasn’t bright enough, or I wanted to crop a certain part of the image. But it makes me wonder– at what point is all this editing too much? Is there a point where it isn’t considered raw art, but merely talent with the use of PhotoShop?
Often we see before and after PhotoShop pictures of celebrities. The results are utterly shocking and sometimes disgusting. You can have five inches shaved off your waist. Tummy rolls are gone. Wrinkles are blurred and blended. Flyaway hairs are erased. Everything is perfect.
But that’s exactly it. There is no rawness. It’s a personal opinion, of course, but I think what makes a photo, or celebrity, relatable is their flaws. We all have our own flaws. And when we’re looking at that perfect PhotoShopped image, all we want is to be like them. We start to idolize this perfection, when, in fact, none of it is completely real.
So, to answer my own question, yes, I think there is a point where PhotoShop is too much. When an image starts to look completely different than what it actually is, it starts to lose what makes it relatable and its real.