Photo-manipulations vs. photography

Started 3 months ago | Polls thread
Don Lacy
Don Lacy Senior Member • Posts: 2,025
Re: Photo-manipulations vs. photography

mamallama wrote:

Don Lacy wrote:

mamallama wrote:

Photo manipulations imply distorting reality which is not photography. Things like blue screening and cutting objects out of a scene are distortions of reality and thus not photography.

So if I do say a Humming bird set up were I use a flower that I placed sugar water in then place a artificial back ground behind it and use six flashes to light everything it’s not a photograph according to your definition. So I guess my sons school pictures are not photographs either. I am confused when did the definition change and who changed it.

Only on a dpr forum are there arguments about the definitions of very simple fundamental things:

Dictionary definition:

Photograph: representing nature and human beings with exactness.

Both of your examples fit the above definition of a photograph.

Both of my examples distorted reality or more important show a false reality so my question is why in the process of of making an image does it matter when I distort reality.  If I do it before I press the shutter it’s a photograph after I press the shutter in a editing program it no longer is a photograph one of the problems I have with that is when it was done in a dark room it was still considered a photograph.  So why have the rules changed if I did a double exposure using film it’s a photograph if I combine two I’mages in PS it’s no longer a photograph.

 Don Lacy's gear list:Don Lacy's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M100 Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II +11 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow