Am I missing something?

There's no need to defend yourselves that your images are great without any editing. Photoshop is as much of an art as Photography if used to its potential. I for one have no issues with any amount of photoshopping, if the final image is pleasing (no matter how unreal) then that's what's important to me. In fact I have a few ideas for some photo manipulation projects myself.

Those here who have mastered composition & exposure & already make great images without any digital tinkering would still benefit from mastering photoshop to take their images to the next level.

Thanks for all the comments so far.

It looks as though we all see different results and want to adjust to our own personal taste.

I don't use PS, much, but it looks as though I'm not alone. What I need to do is learn to adjust contrast/colour so my pictures appeal to a wider (not just me!) audience.

Not all my shots need looking at with a view to manipulation, just some.

Normally I do very little. I crop, adjust colour/saturation, levels etc. 99% of what I do would be done by choosing film, paper, developer combinations, and dodging and burning the in the darkroom. About the only things I do which don't have analogue equivalents are sharpening (a necessary step for digital sensors) and cloning the odd annoying artefact out of the picture. This weeks comp entry involved considerably more photoshop work than I usually employ, and I would have liked time to work on it more. I had quite a few attempts at taking the shot (I have very little experience of using flash in a studio like way) and I am not sure I chose the best "negative" from which to produce my "print".

Best wishes, Kris.

Ah! Flash, now that's a different issue.

When using flash, something I avoid, I really should Photoshop!

Any ideas?

Maybe.

Not in my view.

Practice.

G

Fair comments George, as the winter days grow darker I'm going to play, sorry, practice with my flash stuff and who knows, I may get it right.

But there again...