Is Post Processing Dishonest? A discussion arose from a previous post, where it was said: - the term "Photoshopped" has depreciated to mean a dishonest manipulation of reality

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

A discussion arose from a previous post, where it was said:

- the term "Photoshopped" has depreciated to mean a dishonest manipulation of reality
- street photography should be "as-shot"
- and composite images were put into question

I ask then, is Post Processing Dishonest? S-

--
There's a parallel discussion here http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-360166-1.html

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

St3v3M wrote:

A discussion arose from a previous post, where it was said:

- the term "Photoshopped" has depreciated to mean a dishonest manipulation of reality
- street photography should be "as-shot"
- and composite images were put into question

I ask then, is Post Processing Dishonest? S-

Short answer - No -

Something is done in Photoshop and portrayed as something else to deceive........now that's another story.

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Frank2013 wrote:

Short answer - No -

Something is done in Photoshop and portrayed as something else to deceive........now that's another story.

What about in street photography, or photojournalism? S-

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

St3v3M wrote:

A discussion arose from a previous post, where it was said:

- the term "Photoshopped" has depreciated to mean a dishonest manipulation of reality
- street photography should be "as-shot"
- and composite images were put into question

I ask then, is Post Processing Dishonest? S-

There is no action that is good or bad in and of itself. (Certainly even that statement is questionable.. was it good or bad that a nuke was dropped on Japan 1945).

But the point is, that question is better answered with context. Misrepresenting information vs photographer's vision. You have to have context, the question is absurd by itself (to me anyway). I guess I don't like word games..

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Photography is nearly always dishonest because of inclusion and exclusion of elements in a scene, in other words composition.

In photojournalism most "post processing" is considered dishonest. This has to do with changing the interpretation of reality not optimization for printing,

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

St3v3M wrote:

What about in street photography, or photojournalism? S-

genre is one thing, how the image is used is one thing.

Seems like if I want to put red umbrellas in a street scene, there isn't anything inherently wrong in doing so. BUT, if red umbrellas have privacy rights and there is a concern about where they are allowed to travel, and suddenly they are shown as all over a given place, then perhaps there is an issue. -- edit, makes me think of an invasion of red umbrellas reported by radio and the ensuing panic.

Second edit -- so... perhaps black and white street scenes are a misrepresentation of reality!! See what I mean, the whole thing is absurd.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

St3v3M wrote:

What about in street photography, or photojournalism? S-

Every home craftsperson owns a set of burglary tools.

There are fools, who can't use them, who say possession is criminal. But who cares what such a fool might think?

R.G. Loc: Scotland

St3v3M wrote:

.....I ask then, is Post Processing Dishonest? S-

People's intentions are honest/dishonest. Post processing can be used to bring out a photo's full potential (either honestly or dishonestly). When I'm using PP I try to envisage what the shot would have been like if it had been taken in ideal circumstances, and I try to use PP to bring the shot closer to that ideal. And no I don't go around feeling guilty about it :-) .

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

Apaflo wrote:

Every home craftsperson owns a set of burglary tools.

There are fools, who can't use them, who say possession is criminal. But who cares what such a fool might think?

LOL - my idea of best answer so far!

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

St3v3M wrote:

What about in street photography, or photojournalism? S-

No matter the genre, to purposefully deceive about anything is not something to be tolerated in my opinion.

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

R.G. wrote:

People's intentions are honest/dishonest. Post processing can be used to bring out a photo's full potential (either honestly or dishonestly). When I'm using PP I try to envisage what the shot would have been like if it had been taken in ideal circumstances, and I try to use PP to bring the shot closer to that ideal. And no I don't go around feeling guilty about it :-) .

An interesting example also had to do with how far one goes... If I shoot an insect or a landscape, it is likely that the beer can gets "healed".

What about changing color casts? Is it ok to fix it? Is it ok to do Sepia because it looks nicer?

I agree it is all about the purpose of the image as determined by the photographer.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Frank2013 wrote:

...Something is done in Photoshop and portrayed as something else to deceive........now that's another story.

This has been a point to ponder for me for several months, first brought up in an early FYC topic:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-326537-1.html#5479170

Regarding composites, if I know an image is a composite, I can look at the creation with an eye to originality, technical skill, creativity, and can enjoy my emotional response to the whole art of the piece.

If someone offers an altered image with intent to deceive, or to ridicule those who innocently compliment its seemingly authentic origins, that is a very sad commentary on the creators character.

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

pfrancke wrote:

An interesting example also had to do with how far one goes... ...

Let's go there too - How Far Is Too Far? S-

chaman

No. But is yet another great excuse to use by those who do not know how to properly apply it along with the ones who love to say they only post SOOC images....even when most of them are mediocre. Of course the is just my opinion.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

St3v3M wrote:

Let's go there too - How Far Is Too Far? S-

Everyone should be able to find and express their own artistic voice. Totally in the eye of the beholder, and their right, to like it or not like it.