November 26, 2014, 03:56:03 AM

Author Topic: Wrong Photography Ethics?  (Read 39784 times)

gary

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #45 on: May 09, 2013, 04:48:31 PM »
This is the "I remember when......., things were so much better back in the day" argument. We are in today not in the past and today provides the tools to do all sorts of magical things. It amazes me how we torture innovators to desperately cling to the past. Turner, one of the worlds great painters was roundly abused in his day for his vision which was only reality as he saw it, now of course we recognize his genius. Surely photography is art, not just a representation or photocopy of the world around us. Manipulate your photo's however you wish and I for one will judge them purely based upon my own taste and not on others rules of right or wrong.     
5D Mkiii -  16-35L mkii, 24-70L mkii, 70-200L IS mkii, 85 1.8

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #45 on: May 09, 2013, 04:48:31 PM »

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #46 on: May 09, 2013, 05:01:36 PM »
As long as the photographer is not entering a competition and not breaking its rules, to me it doesn't matter what the photographer does with the image, it is his image, his vision  ...as far as I'm concerned he can remove/add whatever he wants. Those who are capable of making awesome changes/modifications will continue to do so while those who are incapable will continue to crib that it is unethical.
Yes and my quick little global adjustments didn't mean that I didn't like the OP's edit.  Just throwing it up for comparison.  Personally, I think the clouds added a nice touch...  Conversely, I see you don't have to do that if you choose not too, there are other options, ie: global edits...
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #47 on: May 09, 2013, 05:02:07 PM »
This is the "I remember when......., things were so much better back in the day" argument. We are in today not in the past and today provides the tools to do all sorts of magical things. It amazes me how we torture innovators to desperately cling to the past. Turner, one of the worlds great painters was roundly abused in his day for his vision which was only reality as he saw it, now of course we recognize his genius. Surely photography is art, not just a representation or photocopy of the world around us. Manipulate your photo's however you wish and I for one will judge them purely based upon my own taste and not on others rules of right or wrong.   
Perfect!  Nuff said!  ;)
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

kennephoto

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #48 on: May 09, 2013, 05:16:39 PM »
This is a pretty stupid topic. It's all opinions vs opinions. It's never going to go anywhere. To the OP I like your photo either way, heck put the trees back and add a thunderstorm enter it into a contest and win. Heck if the contest doesn't state you can't edit photos then go for it! Everyone else has access to the same tools as you do. People can take photos of cheetahs if they want to. What's the big deal? No one wants a boring photo, if that's what the OP saw but nature changed before he could get the photo then recreate to how it was in the minds eye. If I bought that PHOTO from the OP I wouldn't care about the edit because looking at it everyday would better my mood. Is the film negative the photo and everything after is a print or copy of the photo? This debate will be even worse 100 years from now, when photography will probably have evolved yet again. How about Instagram are those photos or digital art? Just enjoy life and take photos or whatever you want to call them! Print them share them sell them. Enjoy what you and others create and stop wasting time criticizing!
Canon 5d Mark II Canon 1D classic EOSM 20-35 2.8L 50 1.2L 135 2.0L 80-200 2.8L 40 Pancake and a bunch of old film cameras

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #49 on: May 09, 2013, 05:20:35 PM »
This is a pretty stupid topic. It's all opinions vs opinions. It's never going to go anywhere. To the OP I like your photo either way, heck put the trees back and add a thunderstorm enter it into a contest and win. Heck if the contest doesn't state you can't edit photos then go for it! Everyone else has access to the same tools as you do. People can take photos of cheetahs if they want to. What's the big deal? No one wants a boring photo, if that's what the OP saw but nature changed before he could get the photo then recreate to how it was in the minds eye. If I bought that PHOTO from the OP I wouldn't care about the edit because looking at it everyday would better my mood. Is the film negative the photo and everything after is a print or copy of the photo? This debate will be even worse 100 years from now, when photography will probably have evolved yet again. How about Instagram are those photos or digital art? Just enjoy life and take photos or whatever you want to call them! Print them share them sell them. Enjoy what you and others create and stop wasting time criticizing!
Quote
This is a pretty stupid topic.
Quote
Enjoy what you and others create and stop wasting time criticizing!
That was a bit critical, no?  :)  Seems like, "I like his image" would have been more apropos!
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3522
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #50 on: May 09, 2013, 05:28:53 PM »
It's easy to get carried away when compositing...  ::)

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #51 on: May 09, 2013, 05:29:46 PM »
I found the sky boring and added clouds to make it more interesting.

Do you think this is cheating? I really want to know.

Am very confused. I have made changes but not altered nature. Have I done something wrong?

Thx



oooops - my apologies to sanj, but I was bored this evening.

Maybe passing something like this off as how it really was might be deemed a little 'unethical' !

I hope I haven't given offence by manipulating your image. I have deleted it.
I think the ambient light is hitting them from the wrong direction... Do you have any skies which would portray the sunset even further to the right?  Wait a minute, did you manipulate this image??  LoL!  Nice!
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #51 on: May 09, 2013, 05:29:46 PM »

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #52 on: May 09, 2013, 05:31:16 PM »
I found the sky boring and added clouds to make it more interesting.

Do you think this is cheating? I really want to know.

Am very confused. I have made changes but not altered nature. Have I done something wrong?

Thx



oooops - my apologies to sanj, but I was bored this evening.

Maybe passing something like this off as how it really was might be deemed a little 'unethical' !

I hope I haven't given offence by manipulating your image. I have deleted it.

( PS. I think it was Ansel Adams that said '50% of photography is done in the darkroom"
Quote
( PS. I think it was Ansel Adams that said '50% of photography is done in the darkroom"
Shhh, He was thinking it, he didn't really say it!
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

Jules

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 28
  • Sunset Lover
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #53 on: May 09, 2013, 05:32:46 PM »
My take is that it is OK to remove a few stuff when they were not supposed to be there, but not so much OK to add ... For example i hated that when Stockholm was full of contruction cranes all over the place and i couldn't take a pict without them ...
EOS 40D | EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM | EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS | EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS | EF 50mm f/1.8 II | EF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM | Speedlite 430EX
My flickr

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3476
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #54 on: May 09, 2013, 06:06:45 PM »
As long as the photographer is not entering a competition and not breaking its rules, to me it doesn't matter what the photographer does with the image, it is his image, his vision  ...as far as I'm concerned he can remove/add whatever he wants. Those who are capable of making awesome changes/modifications will continue to do so while those who are incapable will continue to crib that it is unethical.

+10^99999

If I were to buy a print to hang on my wall, I would have chosen #2. Whoop-de-do, he played with the sky, but the essence of the shot remains the same.... three big wild cats. If you want to carry the logic through, people should not sharpen images, or color balance, or crop.... Even the act of pointing the camera or zooming in/out is to modify what is being represented.

Put things in perspective, it's not like Godzilla is walking along the skyline...It's a nice image. I like it.
The best camera is the one in your hands

3kramd5

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 459
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #55 on: May 09, 2013, 06:10:23 PM »
I found the sky boring and added clouds to make it more interesting.

Do you think this is cheating? I really want to know.

Am very confused. I have made changes but not altered nature. Have I done something wrong?

Thx

No, you have not. It looks better. It's not as if you added an extra cheetah. I don't even particularly think you need to disclose it. It looks natural.

There is a common theme on photo forums, with certain people suggesting that a photo should be what the photographer saw. Maybe if one takes that statement metaphysically (as in: saw in his mind's eye type of thing), I agree. Literally? I do not, and I find it funny when those same people then post desaturated images of their dinner at f/1.2 with the camera held at MFD. This isn't that theme, but it's kinda like it.

To me, the end product has always been about what I want it to be. I'm not a photojournalist; there are rules in that realm for good reason. When it comes to art, do what you want to do. Your image is art.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2013, 06:13:24 PM by 3kramd5 »
5D3, 5D2, 40D; Various lenses

Rocguy

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #56 on: May 09, 2013, 06:20:52 PM »
This is an interesting discussion. I was looking at some beautiful macro photos (of insects) recently. And trying to figure out how they got the whole image to be in perfect focus led me to reading about focus stacking. And my first reaction was  "well that's cheating!!!".  :o

I certainly wouldn't call it unethical though. As long as they (the "photographer") are not trying to imply the end "photo" is a one take shot. When it really was 20 photographs blended together through digital manipulation. The end results are still beautiful. But I am not as impressed with them as photographs. Really. What they really show is great skill in digital manipulation. Or maybe not even great skill? For all I know it's super easy to load up 20 images in photoshop and boom you have 1 great focus stacked image.

I'm not sure where you draw the line and where something crosses from being a photograph into being a work of digital art. But there's a line somewhere. It may be a thick, wavy, grey line but there's a line. Personally I'm more interested in the photography side of it and less in the digital manipulation as art side...


3kramd5

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 459
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #57 on: May 09, 2013, 06:21:58 PM »
If I can do it in the wet darkroom (cropping, dodging, burning, filtering) then it's completely legal

You might not be able to do it in the darkroom, but if someone else with a different skillset can, does it become legal?

Was it illegal when Jerry Uelsmann shot all the requisite film, built the appropriate masks, and then used a series of enlargers along with consummate skill to print this image in a darkroom in 1976?

« Last Edit: May 09, 2013, 06:25:18 PM by 3kramd5 »
5D3, 5D2, 40D; Various lenses

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #57 on: May 09, 2013, 06:21:58 PM »

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3522
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #58 on: May 09, 2013, 06:23:46 PM »
If I can do it in the wet darkroom (cropping, dodging, burning, filtering) then it's completely legal

You might not be able to do it in the darkroom, but if someone else with a different skillset can, does it become legal?

Was it legal when Jerry Uelsmann shot all the requisite negatives, built the appropriate masks, and then used a series of enlargers to print this image in a darkroom in 1976?



That's great Artwork than involved good photography but the final product would be classified by me as Artwork.

3kramd5

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 459
    • View Profile
Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #59 on: May 09, 2013, 06:28:48 PM »
That's great Artwork than involved good photography but the final product would be classified by me as Artwork.

I'd say it's good artwork that involved great photography.

Think about how you'd have to shoot. Intentionally under or overexposing certain areas to result in thin or thick negatives to aid in composting, printing and printing and printing to find placement and build masks, then going through an elaborate sequence (I think I read once he uses a dozen or so enlargers for some of his more elaborate works) of printing in the dark with no indication what's been exposed until you drop it in the developer.

It boggles my mind, regardless of what one calls the final product. :)
5D3, 5D2, 40D; Various lenses

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« Reply #59 on: May 09, 2013, 06:28:48 PM »