Digital ethics

Boon

Boon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,619
Edit My Images
Yes
hi
i dont want to give out the wrong message here, but i would like to know where people stand on this issue.
For example:
is it ok to place something into your photo that wasn't there on the day?
is it ok to remove something from your photo that shouldn't be there?
where is the line drawn between photography and making a digital montage?
when does it stop becoming photography knowledge and become photoshop knowledge.
Does anyone think Digital makes photographers idle, by not composing shots properly because they can adjust later using a graphic manipulation program.
I would love to hear peoples comments on this matter. :confused:
stevannie
 
erm, the line comes when you add something that wasn't there originally surely?
 
hi
does this mean no nice blue skies on a dreary day then? :whistle2:
stevannie
 
I don't have a problem with either as long as the photographer is honest about what they've done.

Removing artifacts from an image to make it more pleasing is acceptable, as long as you aren't removing a big part of the scene. (i.e. remove a dot on the horizon of the guy walking his dog).
 
I don't enjoy editing so I don't do much of it and try to capture what I want in the camera. If there was a pile of rubbish next to a flower I might frame the shot to exclude the rubbish. Nice flower in a green field or blossom in a fly tip?

If I take a picture - its my picture. Its not reality captured for posterity - its an image that pleases me (or I hope it will). So if someone takes a different approach to how they create an image thats fine by me. Photochop it to be something else if you want.

Where I would object is if the object was to maliciously decieve. Declared changes for the fun of it - why not?
 
Stepping outside the box for a moment, isn't it all about creating an image, and the purposes for which the images in question are intended?

Eg for photo-journalism, it's unethical and misleading to add/remove things to or from an image. But in other cases... well, it's purely subjective, isn't it? And just because digital has made it easier to edit images, it doesn't mean that images have never been doctored in one way or another, does it? (Even if it was done with hatpins...)

hoax.jpg
 
hi
i have just read the whole thread, and wow some amazing things there. I think my biggest problem with this sublect is, while its ok to remove distracting artifacts from your shots, i dont believe its ok to add loads of stuff. Others may differ, and i may change my mind eventually.
thanks
stevannie
 
it was an interesting thread, Pook hasnt been on here since August though, which i personally think is a shame, a talented photographer and manipulator, but a bit hot tempered! MarkyG not been here for a long time either.
 
The rules for me are fairly well-established. Images can be 'enhanced' according to the old darkroom techniques - burning, dodging, lightening, darkening, altering the hue and contrast etc.
What I can't do is 'manipulate' images - that is, alter the content of the image - if it wasn't ther in the original image, it can't be there in the finished product.
Another reason I shoot RAW - the integrity of the original image is untouched by post-processing - very important if the images are used as evidence in court - as anyone's could be if you happened to be in the right place at the right time.
A New York Times photographer was sacked during the Gulf War for altering one of his images to make the expression on one of the people in the background better. The face off a subsequent frame of the same scene was superimposed and someone spotted it after it was run in the paper.

It's a big no-no.

But for 'artistic' imagery - there are no holds barred other than the limits of your imagination. As long as you put 'Manipulated Image' somewhere in the File Info, you're covered legally.
 
You bunch of luddites. :)

Its all art, at the end of the day - however you achieve it.
 
But that is the point I think GfK - some people see themselves as artists in one particular piece of the jigsaw - be that shooting or editing :)
 
As I said - it depends on what you're using the images for.
My work is documentary in nature, so I have to be scrupulous in my treatment of images.

If it's just for personal use/fun, then no holds barred...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top