Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is This Cheating?  
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1150 times:

We have discussed here repeatedly about composite pictures not being fair to put together with other pics. But I was wondering what you guys think about this one.

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Charles Falk


I confess that that was not at all the picture I was trying to take. But I made a manipulation error with the camera, and the picture came out very dark and muddy (but you could still see details like the registration number). So I floored the contrast, raised the intensity of the blues, and voila! - An artsy shot!

Is this cheating?

Charles

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3995 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1051 times:

Myself I don't consider this cheating or to be a 'fake' while it is certainly 'manupilated' I still would not consider this cheating.

Now if this were a newspaper or a magazine, then you might be getting into a gray area.


Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineTappan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1538 posts, RR: 41
Reply 2, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1035 times:

Hard to say...I like to keep it the way I saw it....
I like the mood of your picture though
Mark G


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1016 times:

Exposure aside (and I guess most of us adjust this to a greater or lesser degree digitally), the effect could have been acheived using a blue filter when the pic was taken. Whether you use a "blue filter" on the lens, in a darkroom or in the computer seems irrelevant to me.

Although I used to use camera filters quite a bit, I now prefer not to as filtration can be more precisely applied in the computer when required - this also eliminates any loss of light problems caused by the filter. Only exception to this is the polarizer - I can't see anyway to replicate this digitally!

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1002 times:

Cheater, Cheater......Cheater ...............................


Just kidding. I like the picture the way it is. Even though I was not meant to be that way, still a nice shot.

Regards
Vasco G.


User currently offlineInvader From Netherlands, joined Feb 2000, 325 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 977 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

While trying to find something on the web on a totally different subject, I dropped into the following : http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98may/photo.htm. It is about digital enhancing of photos. Although it is a very long story and mainly about nature photography, it might give you some food for thought. I have lifted out two parts and copied them below :

1) "In 1991 the board of directors of the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA), noting that emerging electronic technology enabled "the manipulation of the content of an image in such a way that the change is virtually undetectable," adopted a statement of principle: "As journalists we believe the guiding principle of our profession is accuracy; therefore, we believe it is wrong to alter the content of a photograph in any way that deceives the public."

2) "About three years ago I led the industry in demanding from my agencies that they start labeling digital illustrations as such. They concurred and started labeling. Now most stock agencies around the world are following suit. I think the rest of the photographers at Jackson Hole thought that that was the most appropriate way of presenting the work. They also felt that digital enhancement -- darkening of sky, say, and other things that had been done in the past by printing techniques in the darkroom -- need not be labeled."

Regards,
Peter


User currently offlineLawrence Feir From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 39 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 981 times:

I'm not touching this one.........  

User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3125 posts, RR: 14
Reply 7, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 977 times:

I don't think it's cheating. If you had put a moon in the background or some clouds with a nice pink light, then it would be cheating. Just my opinion.

Luis, Faro, Portugal


User currently offlineTappan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1538 posts, RR: 41
Reply 8, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 956 times:

hey, don't start any moon rumors Luis  Smile
Cheers
Mark Garfinkel


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3125 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 952 times:

LLLLLLOOOLLLLLLL Mark

he he he

thanks, you made me laugh alone in my room  Smile

Luis

P.S. I'm still laughing, he he he


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (13 years 9 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 934 times:

Shame about composites - I got some amazing shots of a lunar eclipse recently - blood red moon - but unfortunately no aircraft flew into the frame!

Thank's for sharing those quotes with us Peter - they concur with my thinking on the subject, but in my view, that still offers a fair bit of latitude. For example, photographers have been swapping skies in the darkroom since the dawn of flight - its acually a fairly simple manipulation

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is This A Good Lens? posted Sat Dec 13 2008 17:57:30 by 76794p
Is This 2x Exactly The Same Pic? posted Tue Sep 23 2008 15:15:18 by Birdwatching
What B777 Is This? posted Sat Aug 23 2008 01:47:35 by PiloteAlpha
Is This Photo Under Or Over Saturated? posted Wed Aug 6 2008 10:46:09 by Jackconnah
Is This One Worth A Fix Up? posted Sat Jul 26 2008 21:39:55 by Jgpitre
Which Type Is This? posted Wed Mar 5 2008 10:20:28 by AirKas1
Is This Any Good? posted Sun Feb 24 2008 06:07:43 by Walter2222
Is This Sufficiently Levelled? posted Tue Feb 19 2008 12:04:40 by Mictheslik
Is This A Motiv Issue? posted Wed Feb 13 2008 13:25:36 by AirMalta
Is This A Good Match Of Camara And Lens posted Sat Feb 9 2008 13:40:19 by Gulfstream