Did you know using PS is cheating?

Started 6 months ago | Discussions
brick33308
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,172
Like?
Did you know using PS is cheating?
6 months ago

Or so says Florida Nature Photagrapher in his post (linked below) responding to my retouch of the OP's photo (per her invitation). Immediately following his assertion are my 2 separate responses.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52970768

Mako2011
Forum ProPosts: 15,049
Like?
Why
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

brick33308 wrote:

Or so says Florida Nature Photagrapher in his post (linked below) responding to my retouch of the OP's photo (per her invitation). Immediately following his assertion are my 2 separate responses.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52970768

Why bring the argument here?

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Historicity
Regular MemberPosts: 319Gear list
Like?
I can see why
In reply to Mako2011, 6 months ago

Mako2011 wrote:

brick33308 wrote:

Or so says Florida Nature Photagrapher in his post (linked below) responding to my retouch of the OP's photo (per her invitation). Immediately following his assertion are my 2 separate responses.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52970768

Why bring the argument here?

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Mako,

I can see why -- or rather, I can imagine a good reason for it if I were in that discussion (which I just read most of).   This discussion was buried and lost in the very long Newgirliz concerns, so it is interesting to break it loose as Brick has done.  I've thought about this quite a bit, should I strive for complete accuracy in a photo, use PP only to make things just the way I saw them (to the best of my recollection and ability)  if my camera can't, or didn't through my ineptness?  Or should I take the accurate photo, if reality turns out a bit drab, and make it more interesting?  I tend to compromise.  If a photo is fine as it is, I leave it alone.  If the photo doesn't look like the reality I tried to shoot, I will try to retrieve the reality with Light Room.  If on the other hand, and despite reality, I have a photo I might otherwise delete, I don't mind playing with it in PP.  That's just my view at the moment.  I have a bit of an artistic background and have, through a Topaz preset made a photo look more like a painting, and liked it, but I really don't know why.

In regard to the argument it sounded to me like Florida Nature Photographer was objecting to the extremes that Photoshop is capable of, putting a whale on her couch for example.  She (he?  I don't recall) wouldn't have objected to making a photo look more like reality -- can't be sure, but that was my impression.

Lawrence

 Historicity's gear list:Historicity's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Olympus E-330 Olympus E-420 Olympus E-500 +43 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Florida Nature Photographer
Senior MemberPosts: 3,966Gear list
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

brick33308 wrote:

Or so says Florida Nature Photagrapher in his post (linked below) responding to my retouch of the OP's photo (per her invitation). Immediately following his assertion are my 2 separate responses.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52970768

For those who don't click through to the link I didn't say that using PhotoShop is cheating.

In reworking a photo a new background was added that was not present when the photograph was taken and I responded to that with the comment "To me that is cheating".

My post was an attempt to generate friendly discussion on the limits we as photographers should set when enhancing a photograph.

I am very new to this craft and I am trying to establish for myself what is and is not reasonable. I won't be able to do that without input from folks like you.

I make my best effort to generate discussion without offending anyone. In this case I clearly failed. I regret the poor use of my communication skills. I do not regret my attempt to gain perspective from the views of others.

P.S. Lawrence, I'm a he.

 Florida Nature Photographer's gear list:Florida Nature Photographer's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Topaz Adjust +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jim B (MSP)
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,639
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

I think you may have taken it a bit too personally.

I think the debate that you really want should be based on his initial assumption:

"If you can create things like that out of thin air it takes all of the challenge out of field work. There wasn't a blue green background behind the girl. Why not commission a painter to create whatever you want?

This is photography. This is capturing life."

Or to restate the question in my words- is photography engineering, or art ?

To answer that,  I like "both", as long as the viewer knows what you want to accomplish.

-- hide signature --

Jim
"It's all about the light"

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
silvershoes
Regular MemberPosts: 271
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to Florida Nature Photographer, 6 months ago
In reworking a photo a new background was added that was not present when the photograph was taken and I responded to that with the comment "To me that is cheating".

My post was an attempt to generate friendly discussion on the limits we as photographers should set when enhancing a photograph.

It's a fair question, but one you'll have to decide for yourself in the end.

In the days of film, you'd frequently visit a hotel room only to find out it was a lot smaller than the photo in the brochure you used to book it, because the photographer had used a wide angle lens to make it look more spacious. Cameras can be made to lie, always could.

For a portrait, I'm not sure the actual background matters, since the subject is the person and the background is simply that, a background.

But I've also seen digital photos that were tortured beyond belief - even here. Including one in particular of a landscape that was almost completely manufactured - the colors were glorious, but there were at least 5 different light sources from the "sun", all at different angles. It garnered a lot of praise from some members, but it gave more experienced photographers a raging headache.

My personal rule is that my photos have to be true to the subject so a stranger coming on the person or scene wouldn't feel misled. So for example, if I screw up exposure of autumn leaves, I happily adjust the color/exposure in PS to the way I remember it, but I never turn green leaves red.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dwight3
Senior MemberPosts: 1,801Gear list
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to Florida Nature Photographer, 6 months ago

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

...In reworking a photo a new background was added that was not present when the photograph was taken and I responded to that with the comment "To me that is cheating".

My post was an attempt to generate friendly discussion on the limits we as photographers should set when enhancing a photograph.

I am very new to this craft and I am trying to establish for myself what is and is not reasonable...

This subject has come up repeatedly. There are two views of photography. One view holds that the camera should capture things just as they are. I call this forensic photography. The other view holds that photography is an art and anything goes. I call this artistic photography.

There is room in life for both kinds. I would guess that most of the inhabitants of this forum lean toward the artistic since "retouching" is widely used in artistic photography. They will argue that forensic photography is only of use in newspapers and court.

I believe that both kinds of photography are possible in the same image, but it's a challenge and involves more setup than postprocessing work.

The forensic photographers have to recognize that all photographs are processed. The data on the digital sensor is not a viewable image. To get something that will show on your computer, the data has to be processed to form a jpg, tiff, bmp, png, or some other file format that the computer can display. For many cameras, the processing is done within the camera. Even film was developed and printed, and differences in the chemical processing can lead to different images.

 dwight3's gear list:dwight3's gear list
Nikon Coolpix S52c Nikon D200 Nikon D4 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
carl english
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,785Gear list
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to Jim B (MSP), 6 months ago

I saw no problem with Florida Nature Photographers comments but the decision of background is a personal thing, no big deal, one comment by Florida Nature Photographer re returning to scene at twilight hour (think that's right) is not always possible in fact sometimes never possible, so if author feels a few adjustments in PP enhances the image then?

 carl english's gear list:carl english's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Glen Barrington
Forum ProPosts: 12,518
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to Florida Nature Photographer, 6 months ago

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

brick33308 wrote:

Or so says Florida Nature Photagrapher in his post (linked below) responding to my retouch of the OP's photo (per her invitation). Immediately following his assertion are my 2 separate responses.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52970768

For those who don't click through to the link I didn't say that using PhotoShop is cheating.

In reworking a photo a new background was added that was not present when the photograph was taken and I responded to that with the comment "To me that is cheating".

My post was an attempt to generate friendly discussion on the limits we as photographers should set when enhancing a photograph.

This is something every photographer needs to decide for themselves. I'm good with any decision anyone makes in this regard as long as they avoid making universal statements about what standards I should apply to my photography.

I am very new to this craft and I am trying to establish for myself what is and is not reasonable. I won't be able to do that without input from folks like you.

Personally, I'm in the school of thought, that anything is OK if it results in an image that SAYS something, and says it well.  "Philosophically Pure" photos that aren't very good, are still lousy photographs!

I make my best effort to generate discussion without offending anyone. In this case I clearly failed. I regret the poor use of my communication skills. I do not regret my attempt to gain perspective from the views of others.

You weren't offensive by my standards.  Though if you read these forum posts for a few more weeks, I'm sure you'll see PLENTY of offensive behavior.

-- hide signature --

I still like soup. . .
Fine Art Flyover Country:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/2505841@N22

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brick33308
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,172
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to Florida Nature Photographer, 6 months ago

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

For those who don't click through to the link I didn't say that using PhotoShop is cheating.

You said "Another reason that I stay away from PhotoShop/Elements. To me that is cheating"

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
suddie1215
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,773Gear list
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

I have nothing against "photoshopping" or post processing but that's just awful editing. The little girl looks like she was cut out of the original by a rodent chewing on the edges of the photo. There's a significant halo around her and terrible color fringing on the left side of her hair.  I'd certainly not want to bring additional attention to it.

brick33308 wrote:

Or so says Florida Nature Photagrapher in his post (linked below) responding to my retouch of the OP's photo (per her invitation). Immediately following his assertion are my 2 separate responses.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52970768

 suddie1215's gear list:suddie1215's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS M Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Florida Nature Photographer
Senior MemberPosts: 3,966Gear list
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

brick33308 wrote:

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

For those who don't click through to the link I didn't say that using PhotoShop is cheating.

You said "Another reason that I stay away from PhotoShop/Elements. To me that is cheating"

In the context of our discussion I was saying that I see no need to ADD Photoshop to my tool kit because Lightroom does the basic things that I need and I already know how to use it. I said nothing to infer that those who use Photoshop as a post processing tool are cheating.

I have no quarrel with you. Please stop mis-characterizing my statements. Thank you.

 Florida Nature Photographer's gear list:Florida Nature Photographer's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Topaz Adjust +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
billythek
Senior MemberPosts: 3,497
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to Florida Nature Photographer, 6 months ago

brick33308 wrote:

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

For those who don't click through to the link I didn't say that using PhotoShop is cheating.

You said "Another reason that I stay away from PhotoShop/Elements. To me that is cheating"

In the context of our discussion I was saying that I see no need to ADD Photoshop to my tool kit because Lightroom does the basic things that I need and I already know how to use it. I said nothing to infer that those who use Photoshop as a post processing tool are cheating.

I have no quarrel with you. Please stop mis-characterizing my statements. Thank you.

Oh, please, he is just quoting you.

There are plenty of people that share that opinion, so in a sense, whether you recant now in the face of the retouching forum inquisition doesn't matter. If I were you I'd stick by my guns a little more, it could make a whale of a difference :-).

In my view, if it isn't illegal, or break a rule of a competition, it isn't cheating unless you get caught. So you had better be good at it.
--
- Bill

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brick33308
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,172
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to Florida Nature Photographer, 6 months ago

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

brick33308 wrote:

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

For those who don't click through to the link I didn't say that using PhotoShop is cheating.

You said "Another reason that I stay away from PhotoShop/Elements. To me that is cheating"

In the context of our discussion I was saying that I see no need to ADD Photoshop to my tool kit because Lightroom does the basic things that I need and I already know how to use it. I said nothing to infer that those who use Photoshop as a post processing tool are cheating.

I have no quarrel with you. Please stop mis-characterizing my statements. Thank you.

Mis-characterize??? I simply quoted EXACTLY what you said - nothing more, nothing less. And although you're attempting to wiggle out of and explain away what you said, your words speak for themselves. It would actually be possible to respect you if you had the character to own up to a momentary lapse into boneheadedness rather than attempt to say "black is really white" like so many of our politicians in D.C. do. But you don't have that and/or are so convinced of the righteousness of your position that you're incapable of acknowledging a different point of view.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brick33308
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,172
Like?
Re: Did you know using PS is cheating?
In reply to suddie1215, 6 months ago

suddie1215 wrote:

I have nothing against "photoshopping" or post processing but that's just awful editing. The little girl looks like she was cut out of the original by a rodent chewing on the edges of the photo. There's a significant halo around her and terrible color fringing on the left side of her hair. I'd certainly not want to bring additional attention to it.

brick33308 wrote:

Or so says Florida Nature Photagrapher in his post (linked below) responding to my retouch of the OP's photo (per her invitation). Immediately following his assertion are my 2 separate responses.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52970768

totally agree, and when I offered it to the OP, I pointed out that in the quick retouch I was showing her just to demonstrate possibilities, I didn't take the time to do a proper extraction. Which is also why I asked her if she wanted to post her image in the retouching forum where some truly talented people could work on it.

She told me she wants a full rez copy of what I did, and I was getting ready to tell her my work wasn't up to snuff and to encourage her to post a copy here where you and others will undoubtedly do a much better job.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
edispics
Senior MemberPosts: 1,468
Like?
Some people like Miley Cyrus .....
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

Some people don't

Some people do a bit of post processing

Some people do a lot of post processing

Some people like forensic photography

Some people like artistic photography

So what? When the "Correct Photography Police" appear, then I will worry.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
lylejk
Forum ProPosts: 20,906Gear list
Like?
There's the Ansel Adam's school of thought and then....
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

...there's the purist.   I'm a member of Adam's school.  

-- hide signature --

my avatar
Psalm 109:8
To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary.
To one without faith, no explanation is possible".
~Thomas Aquinas

 lylejk's gear list:lylejk's gear list
Leica V-LUX 1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W7
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Historicity
Regular MemberPosts: 319Gear list
Like?
Re: Some people like Miley Cyrus .....
In reply to edispics, 6 months ago

edispics wrote:

Some people don't

Some people do a bit of post processing

Some people do a lot of post processing

Some people like forensic photography

Some people like artistic photography

So what? When the "Correct Photography Police" appear, then I will worry.

My apologies to Mako.  You were right after all.  I assumed the "discussion" was being brought here to discuss the interesting matter (interesting to me) of photographic-motive, but Florida Nature Photography was brought here to be lambasted all over again with nothing learned and nothing interesting being discussed.

In philosophical terms, there is nothing that can be said that cannot be misunderstood by someone.  Quoting someone's words all over again don't help because FNP continues to have his mild motives in using them and others continue to read his words differently.  Words are not self-authenticating.  I personally can't see negative motives in anything FNP wrote, but because they are being attributed to "him" (sorry FNP for thinking you a "her") this discussion probably isn't going anywhere interesting.

Lawrence (mildly interested in philosophy)

 Historicity's gear list:Historicity's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Olympus E-330 Olympus E-420 Olympus E-500 +43 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brick33308
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,172
Like?
Re: Some people like Miley Cyrus .....
In reply to Historicity, 6 months ago

Historicity wrote:

Florida Nature Photography was brought here to be lambasted all over again with nothing learned and nothing interesting being discussed.

you are incorrect as to my motivation for this thread.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Historicity
Regular MemberPosts: 319Gear list
Like?
Re: Some people like Miley Cyrus .....
In reply to brick33308, 6 months ago

brick33308 wrote:

Historicity wrote:

Florida Nature Photography was brought here to be lambasted all over again with nothing learned and nothing interesting being discussed.

you are incorrect as to my motivation for this thread.

Brick,

You wrote, "you are incorrect as to my motivation for this thread."   Well, there you go -- a case in point; so why did you start this thread?

Lawrence

 Historicity's gear list:Historicity's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Olympus E-330 Olympus E-420 Olympus E-500 +43 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads