Today I have something to different, call it a moral dilemma if you will. The story is this....
The other morning I went to a familiar place to do some shooting at sunrise. And the scene was... well.. as I expected not very attractive. I was hoping for some frosty trees and some clouds, but no luck that day. No can do. Since I was already there, I did two panoramic images to try out my new leveling base and after having them processed I did realize what I thought would happen: too much empty space in the middle of the scene and the trees in the back didn't provide strong enough shapes to be interesting.
No big deal, as I didn't expect anything anyway. I then started to play around a little in Photoshop and used the new "content aware scaling" and kind of squeezed the image to get a little bolder composition. Whereas the result looks a little better (it's still a dull scene, it will be better in spring/summer with some clouds and reflections I hope), it simply doesn't feel right for me to manipulate a landscape photo like this. It goes too far and it's simply cheating. This made me think what I'm fine with and what not.
I'm definitely fine (and usually apply this to my images) with adjusting the colours and removing unwanted objects, like cables, sign-post, houses and so on if that wasn't possible while composing the image. But to kind of reconstruct a scene in such a drastic way like this simply isn't acceptable for me, even though I'm sure no one would notice. Also I wouldn't want to replace the sky with another. Basically for me everything is fine which improves/enhances what is already there, but not something that creates something totally new.
Here are the images. It's actually two different images taken from the same location.
Version 1 is as is and image 2 is the "squeezed" one.
Version 1:
How do feel about something like this? At which point do you think it's too much and a line has been crossed? Feel free to leave your opinion in the comments.
- » In case you missed it...
- » Photoblog Awards 2010
- » Almost missed this...
- » Print Of The Month: Rekvik Pier Mono
- » Merry Christmas
Tags:
post-processing
|
Comments
Thank you very much for visiting my site.
Here on this blog I will post some news about my work or my website. Also from time to time you will find some articles or polls. I'm not that much of a writer, but maybe that changes. In the "Links" (will be up soon) you will find some of my favorite sites. Some of my favorite photoblogs you find in the "About" page.
If you like it here you are welcome to subscribe to the RSS feed, the RSS feed for my photoblog you find in the footer.
You can also find me here:
Posted by Massimo Belloni on March 26, 2009 at 10:05 AM EET #
This algorithm is a genius piece of work (I work in visualization and knew about it before it was integrated in Photoshop) and it does enhance photos. Although here I like both versions. E.g. in 1 the right group of trees is nicer with the lighter background.
Posted by juliaL49 on March 26, 2009 at 12:30 PM EET #
Posted by rj on March 26, 2009 at 01:32 PM EET #
Now lets say you are Joel-Peter Witkin or the ParkeHarrisons- They stage just about everything and take months to get it right, they output about 10 photos a year each.
For me, its about creating an image that just blows me away, I try for this as much as possible and if it means overly manipulating it, then so be it (Not that I achieve it)
We often make images that "Are Not Real" A long exposure is "Not Real" Streaking clouds are not natural, but boy do they look good. The milky texture of the long exposed sea is only seen when we extend the exposure time.
You get into Photographic snobbery when you say its ok to manipulate in camera-but not in PS.
I sometimes liken the manipulation of photos to movies with music, Ever watch a movie that has the music striped away from the scene, its just not the same. However, Im a realist, when I tell my wife I love her, I dont expect a full Orchestral score in the background to enhance the moment.
Sven, you take great images, Thats what its about, end of conversation, People log into your website, look at the image and say "Wow, What a beautiful place" you have taken them there and let them enjoy what you saw. I dont think anybody would complain if you stretched a pixel or 2.
Having said all this, The one exception to my opinion is Photojournalism, I absolutely insist that all Photojournalistic photos must be "As Is"
My 2 Cents or
Posted by Richard Hollingworth on March 26, 2009 at 02:43 PM EET #
I don't see myself or even try to be "true" and a photojournalist I also don't am. I like to process some things of an image and some other things I like to better leave alone. I also don't think someone would complain about pixels being moved, it's more a question to myself on how much processing I think for myself, for my own work, is acceptable. I like to get things right in camera if possible and just adjust the colors and so on.
Maybe my opinion changes once I have to make the decision when changing a image from good to very good with the help of moving some pixels. Who knows, but I'm sure that I would announce/annotate this also.
Again, thanks for your replies.
Posted by Sven on March 27, 2009 at 09:08 PM EET #