- This topic is empty.
Too much Photoshopping
-
I thought this was interesting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9652485/Photography-competition-winner-disqualified-for-too-much-Photoshopping.html” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;
id love to see the original/s to see just how much processing he used . im confused as to how the judges made that decision, as presumably all he had to do was send in a jpeg of the final image.
I guess when Charlie Waite says ‘the level of manipulation means that this photograph gained an unfair advantage’ he perhaps means that the drama present in the image was manufactured in post processing, as opposed to the photographer being present in the scene before him which contained such drama. If that is the case, I can see how such an image would be regarded as unfair/ untrue in the eyes of hardworking landscape photographers who are committed to capturing such scenes in the flesh, as opposed to via their computer.
Here’s a follow up giving some more details that I came across.
http://www.apug.org/forums/redirect-to/?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.petapixel.com%2F2012%2F11%2F02%2Flandscape-photographer-of-the-year-2012-stripped-of-title-for-too-much-shoppin%2F” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;Someone else has highlighted this rule.
11) Digital adjustments.Digital adjustments, including High Dynamic Range (HDR) imaging techniques and the joining together of multiple frames, are allowed in all categories. However, for images entered in Classic view, Living the view and Urban view, the integrity of the subject must be maintained and the making of physical changes to the landscape is not permitted (removing fences, moving trees, stripping in sky from another image etc). The organisers reserve the right to disqualify any image that they feel lacks authenticity due to over-manipulation. The judges will allow more latitude in the ‘Your view’ category, which aims to encourage originality and conceptual thinking. Please see How to enter for further details.
That’s fair enough, you can’t argue too much with the competitions rules for a specific category, and guess it highlights the value of being aware of the specifics & rules of any competition you are entering.
Here is a link to an in depth analysis of the photos involved.
http://www.timparkin.co.uk/2012/10/landscape-photographer-of-the-year-2/” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;
Down with that sort of thing!
bring back the art of the (mostly) unadulterated photo!!!
id be interested to see what some people would produce if they were only allowed to use the most basic of tools – dodge, burn, contrast and crop!!!
It’s always controversial isn’t it. Reminds me of Art Wolf’s zebra shot in his Migrations book way back in the 90s, and about 1/3 of the images in the rest of the book. He said he was just embracing the technology. “It was just that in the beginning we were naive,” he said. But it still happens for effect and we may never know where.
I remember too Princess Diana’s head being turned — literally! — to make it appear she was kissing someone controversially, and, disgracefully, a disabled person being removed from a group pic by a big tabloid newspaper.
We need to draw the line somewhere, but it’s tricky when we’re just dedicated amateurs being really artistic. If the goal leans more towards realism we will have a more narrow interpretation of what we need to do. But when we enter these competitions the rules might sometimes be too narrow for some, myself included.
Would really like to see the original to see just how much has gone on.
When it does go too far though it really should not be classed as photography, just digital imaging.
If photography is to be considered an art form then I think we have to accept that processing of an image in PS or any other tool is now part and parcel of photography.
After all the guys who recorded the american civil war with those big “hide under the blanket and remove the lens cap” cameras of the day did not have the the tools in a darkroom to engage in a bit of dodge and burn techniques. As technology improves there will always be those who consider it kind of cheating to use it to improve our images.
Who amongst us here are still using film cameras or non AF cameras for example. Very few I would think.
Mark S.
I don’t think that the actual use of photoshop is the issue here, but rather the act of inserting elements into the landscape that did not exist or were not actually visible when taking the photograph.
Photoshop is just a range of tools which can help to improve an image in digital photography, just as a darkroom may be used in film photography, but some photographers tend to alter their images rather than just correct them and tend to make them into something completely different than what was in front of the camera.
I think that in competitions such as this one, a raw version of the shot should be required before the image is judged, as it would clearly show any modifications to the final print.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
