GTinSoCal Loc: Palmdale, CA

Yes, get a rope and find an ol' oak tree!!! :lol:
I hope the greenie-weenies don't find out what you did...

I like your image, BTW.

GT

tvsnan

Great summary! I would add too, that I think sometimes people confuse "manipulation/editing" with "alteration" - two very different breeds of cat. Both acceptable in any given realm if that's what you are looking for, or trying to achieve.
I can honestly say that other than people in my photography club, nobody has EVER asked me "what post processing did you do"? Heck, they don't even want to know that I was lying in the mud to get the shot! They want to buy it and that's that.
For me, and this is just me, the problem comes into play when someone has "added" something to a photo to make it better and then claims that he/she is a purist and doesn't fess up to what they did, in order to pass it off as original. That gives the whole artistic community a bad hit. I have seen some Beautifully done "altered" images (one in this thread) and admire the talent it takes to create - but I haven't met anyone who has that talent yet that tries to make anyone believe that is what he/she saw through the viewfinder. There is the difference for me.

tripsy76 Loc: Northshore, MA

I figured that I would go ahead and throw myself into the lion's den. I do consider myself to be both a photographer and a compositor (I also make a comfortable living doing nothing but that). Some of the black and white comments here absolutely amaze me. While I take great pride in selling a shot literally straight out of my camera, there is an equal amount of pride that I feel selling composite work. I sincerely appreciate both as art.
I personally disagree with the "forced to say PS was used attitude." I find it to be somewhat rude and disrespectful to the artist. If someone has a comment or question about a piece, I am more than happy to walk them thru my process as long as they are respectful.
The only time I would personally take an exception to this is if you are presenting something as journalism, or accurate record of an event.
I'm sure I could easily be pounded, prodded, and exiled for my views on this, but I've read soo many threads here that seem to be close-minded and degrading to an otherwise excellent artist's haven. It wasn't that long ago that photographers were looked down upon in general.
Normally I skim these kind of posts, and look elsewhere but the comments that show up quite often may prevent someone who has a real interest in developing and sustaining the future of OUR artform from continuing. Thick skin doesn't form overnight, loss of interest does. Just my opinion, but preferences should be stated as such, and not used to disrespect others. My thanks if you made it to the end of my rant. I had to get it out before I exploded. Sorry if it offends, but I felt it needed to be said.

tvsnan

Wish I would have said it like you did here: "The only time I would personally take an exception to this is if you are presenting something as journalism, or accurate record of an event." That was one of the things I was trying to get across.
I agree with all you've said here, so thanks for your "rant"!
:wink: love your avatar by the way

tripsy76 Loc: Northshore, MA

Thanks tvsnan! Just to be a slight bit snarky, I'll openly admit that I created the shot in camera (iPhone 4 at that), and finished it by distressing the picture with my canon printer, paint, and an exacto knife, before rescanning and applying as my profile picture. Funny enough it's one of the very few times photoshop was not used to composite. Lol!

Sorry! I do appreciate the comment very much. I'm just siting here re-reading my comment and reminding myself that I should just take a deep breath sometimes instead of getting worked up over little things.
I'm glad you enjoyed the rant.

tvsnan

You are very talented! I love this! (your photo) ;-)

Elle Loc: Long Island, NY

My feeling on retouching a photo is not how much but what is it being used for. I expect magazine ads to be retouched, I don't expect a newspaper photo to be. Breaking it down further..if an ad for weight reduction shows an After photo that's been retouched to show a thinner model...Or an ad for pimple cream shows a flawless skin...that's dishonest. If its an ad where the model isn't held up as an example of what a product can do..who cares if it has been photoshopped. In the case of celebrities..if a publicity shot has been altered to make it more attractive..who cares, they'll be outed in person soon enough.

BUDDY36 Loc: Tennessee

well said tripsy. Nuff said!










Buddy36 an old fart!

artlover Loc: NM

Well I guess I was on a good subject. Thank you all for your
responses and for looking at this post.

:-)