Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 13 posts | 
by OntPhoto on Mon Jun 22, 2015 6:15 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 7039
Joined: 9 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
Saw this link posted on DPR.  NY Times blog article on an exhibit of altered images (posed and manipulated documentary photography).

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/posing-questions-of-photographic-ethics/?WT.mc_id=2015-KWP-AUD_DEV&WT.mc_ev=click&ad-keywords=AUDDEVREMARK&kwp_0=20768&kwp_4=135238&kwp_1=157711&_r=1#
 

by stevenmajor on Tue Jun 23, 2015 6:43 am
stevenmajor
Forum Contributor
Posts: 54
Joined: 13 May 2015
We have seen much of this manipulation / untruthfulness in recent years in the nature photography contest world as well. That said, I think most people who spend time in nature with a camera do so because it is a place that holds more truth than anywhere else, and they enjoy the craft of making images that are tributes to that truth.
 

by Ed Cordes on Tue Jun 23, 2015 7:55 am
User avatar
Ed Cordes
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4874
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Location: Corning, NY
Member #:00700
The GREAT DEBATE - Is photography exclusively relegated to exact documentation of every photon hitting the sensor/film or is it an art form in which the image is designed to show the idealized emotion of the scene with elements emphasized and de-emphasized? Photojournalism is certainly in the first category of exact documentation. The debate will continue on nature photography for a long time. That said, I seem to see more and more saturation of colors and masking of a scene's elements among other Photoshop techniques. I am not saying I think it is bad. It is just happening more, and shows that the debate will continiue.
Remember, a little mild insanity keeps us healthy
 

by Primus on Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:36 am
Primus
Lifetime Member
Posts: 905
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: New York
Member #:02003
stevenmajor wrote:We have seen much of this manipulation / untruthfulness in recent years in the nature photography contest world as well. That said, I think most people who spend time in nature with a camera do so because it is a place that holds more truth than anywhere else, and they enjoy the craft of making images that are tributes to that truth.

I am just discovering the world of magazine submissions and  contests. Have never taken part in any competition - even local camera clubs and of course never submitted to a magazine. I like to give my prints away to friends and family and just having them framed on somebody's wall is enough to make me very happy.

However, just for kicks I thought I would dabble in the magazine world and see how it works. I am finding out that it is a dog-eat-dog world there too, with sycophancy, mutual admiration, strange decisions and a whole army of people vying to be published. Competition is always great of course and beauty certainly lies in the eyes of the beholder. The more compelling the back story to the image, the more likely it is to be picked up and admired.

What is important I learned is that you cannot alter your image in content, i.e. no addition or subtraction is allowed. You can crop away to your heart's content and change colors/white balance, sharpness, saturation etc. Cannot remove a twig in the foreground or that offending pole on the side.

In an endeavor to remain 'true and honest' to the image originally shot, can we say that modern processing tools do not alter images significantly without addition or subtraction, i.e 'simple' color/WB/graduation filters/sharpness/exposure adjustments?

So what is an 'original' image then?

Pradeep

Sorry, Ed, read  your post later but I get what you mean.
 

by pleverington on Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:48 am
pleverington
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5355
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Everyone including non photographers knows that all images are likely to have been altered and/or enhanced these days so all images are now worth a whole lot less in factual value to the point they are minimized. The still image just isn't worth that much anymore to people. To some degree or another I'm saying...It's a result of greed in part taking precedent over honesty is what I believe. And the sad truth is we all will suffer some or a lot for it.


Paul
Paul Leverington
"A great image is one that is created, not one that is made"
 

by Primus on Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:13 am
Primus
Lifetime Member
Posts: 905
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: New York
Member #:02003
pleverington wrote:Everyone including non photographers knows that all images are likely to have been altered and/or enhanced these days so all images are now worth a whole lot less in factual value to the point they are minimized. The still image just isn't worth that much anymore to people. To some degree or another I'm saying...It's a result of greed in part taking precedent over honesty is what I believe. And the sad truth is we all will suffer some or a lot for it.


Paul
There is truth in what you say Paul. Recently I posted a picture where I had a close encounter with cheetahs. Most people thought I had 'photoshopped' myself into the frame. There is so much of that that has become the norm that reality as we know it is now an intangible, almost nebulous entity. Looking at some of the most popular images on 500px, the world looks like it went and morphed into this candy-colored fantasia while I was sleeping. 

Pradeep
 

by pleverington on Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:58 am
pleverington
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5355
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Primus wrote:
pleverington wrote:Everyone including non photographers knows that all images are likely to have been altered and/or enhanced these days so all images are now worth a whole lot less in factual value to the point they are minimized. The still image just isn't worth that much anymore to people. To some degree or another I'm saying...It's a result of greed in part taking precedent over honesty is what I believe. And the sad truth is we all will suffer some or a lot for it.


Paul
There is truth in what you say Paul. Recently I posted a picture where I had a close encounter with cheetahs. Most people thought I had 'photoshopped' myself into the frame. There is so much of that that has become the norm that reality as we know it is now an intangible, almost nebulous entity. Looking at some of the most popular images on 500px, the world looks like it went and morphed into this candy-colored fantasia while I was sleeping. 

Pradeep
Candy colored fantasia..........that about sums it up quite well I think. I guess the line between reality and fiction is one we all are walking in perpetuity. We want the one and survive the other in order to fulfill what we want to believe. Perhaps we should accept reality and embrace the struggle more...or is that just too darn boring??


Paul
.
Paul Leverington
"A great image is one that is created, not one that is made"
 

by DChan on Tue Jun 23, 2015 12:11 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
I think that article is about photojournalism. Are you taking photographs for photojournalism, reportage purposes? Answer that question first before you continue.
 

by OntPhoto on Tue Jun 23, 2015 1:53 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 7039
Joined: 9 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
DChan wrote:I think that article is about photojournalism. Are you taking photographs for photojournalism, reportage purposes? Answer that question first before you continue.


Wildlife photography can be documentary in nature in some applications.  Maybe the same principles and ethics can apply to both disciplines?  Some wildlife photography contests do not allow much in the way of manipulation and require the RAW file as testament to what was originally captured.
 

by DChan on Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:20 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
Just to clarify, when I said "for photojournalism, reportage purposes", I was talking about the intent and the use of the final photographs. The subject matter of the photograph could be anything. In fact, when you watch documentary films or photographs, you would see they cover all kinds of subjects, dead or alive :lol: .
 

by Steve Cirone on Wed Jun 24, 2015 7:34 pm
User avatar
Steve Cirone
Lifetime Member
Posts: 2262
Joined: 29 May 2005
Location: El Cajon, California
Member #:00583
We have a vast gray area between "exactly as it was captured in camera RAW" to an image created in photoshop rather than the camera.  No agreement on where to draw the line as to what is OK, except by reading the rules of a photo contest and following them.  Lots of cheating in photo contests for sure, but demanding the RAW sorts it out fast.

But that is only one part of many other issues, which are numerous.  Over the last 20 years I have been part of the jury of tons of huge photo contests here in Southern California.  Unfortunately, many judges have limited photography experience.  Worse yet, some are part of the business of creating the same images they are judging.  Can we say "biased?"  Or, say a wealthy Wall Streeter donates several million to a fancy gallery or museum.  Seems they are often on the board of directors.  Ever wonder how Junior's fuzzy Polaroids get blown up to billboard size and hung in prestigious museums.  Too often Grand Daddy recently donated several million, but a small pittance of the billions he fleeced from middle class IRA's he mismanaged to his insanely great fortune.

Point being, best not to pay a lot of attention to these photo contests.  Even in the best of cases it is all so subjective once the real junk is eliminated.
 
DAILY IMAGE GALLERY:  https://www.facebook.com/steve.cirone.1

 IMAGE GALLERY ARCHIVES WITH EXIF: https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevecirone/
 

by OntPhoto on Sun Jun 28, 2015 9:16 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 7039
Joined: 9 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
stevenmajor wrote:That said, I think most people who spend time in nature with a camera do so because it is a place that holds more truth than anywhere else, and they enjoy the craft of making images that are tributes to that truth.

Hey, I like that.
 

by Dizzy on Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:13 pm
User avatar
Dizzy
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1887
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
Location: Hanover, Pennsylvania
OntPhoto wrote:
stevenmajor wrote:That said, I think most people who spend time in nature with a camera do so because it is a place that holds more truth than anywhere else, and they enjoy the craft of making images that are tributes to that truth.

Hey, I like that.
I like that too!  I am one who shoots mainly birds and flora and I prefer to photograph in natural surroundings. I am not one for "set-ups" and all of the added materials for a "Pretty Photo". I pretty much stopped even posting in the birds forum for all the comments about busy backgrounds and other things that may appear "naturally" in my images.  But that is my choice!  As far as photography ethics, I guess I follow the "Ansel Adams" rules as well as those I practiced through my career in Digital imaging with National Geographic before my retirement 10 or so years back. Back then it was getting a digital scan of a Kodachrome slide to match that slide as closely as possible throughout the printing process. I won't even go into the nightmares of gamut and certain colors the press refused to print. I could write a book on that!  However, and now with Photoshop and your post software, image enhancement is just that and really not considered "Photo-shopping"  as many folks look at it. To this day, digital still does not produce subtleties as well as film but it's getting better and better every day!  So, I wouldn't consider manipulating curves or tweaking levels to recover little details lost to the "digital animal" as cheating. After all it is there and to be had for the asking. We see the image and all of that detail before the exposure so we as photographers or photojournalist prefer all of it in our images. Color correction falls into the same category!

Jim
National Geographic Society (Retired)

Arts N Images ---- Bird and Blooms Blog

"You don't take a photograph, you make it." Ansel Adams
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
13 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group