Ethics of postprocessing (Page 23): That's like saying that every film photo is processed because it was put in developer fluid. So what? That is part of the development of the...

JD750 Loc: SoCal

hangman45 wrote:

Simply put if you are shooting RAW there has to be processing done or you are getting a non viewable collection of data and if you are shooting JPEG the camera is processing image for you so anyone that says they do not process their photos is a flat out liar.

That's like saying that every film photo is processed because it was put in developer fluid. So what? That is part of the development of the original image. The question put forth here is what is considered too much, after the fact, not the in-camera, or raw process, of "developing" the original image.

User ID

hangman45 wrote:

Simply put if you are shooting RAW there has to be processing done or you are getting a non viewable collection of data and if you are shooting JPEG the camera is processing image for you so anyone that says they do not process their photos is a flat out liar.

Yes ! Great. Very simply put. Verrrrry suitable for some other forum in some galaxy long long ago and far far away ....

User ID

JD750 wrote:

That's like saying that every film photo is processed because it was put in developer fluid. So what? That is part of the development of the original image. The question put forth here is what is considered too much, after the fact, not the in-camera, or raw process, of "developing" the original image.

“In-camera” is can be a pretty extensive workshop. The idea of “before can after” doesn’t cut all that clean. Nailing it to the pressing of the shutter release seems very tidy to a sleepy mind, but doesn’t really work in the wide awake world.

Acoarst we have two questions there. One being “What actions constitute editing and *especially* manipulation ?” and the other being “What are the ethics, if any, for editing and manipulation ?”.

dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

Seems to me that the only "ethics" regarding post processing is if you claim you didn't when you did. The rest is all about rendering the "best" image from the data on your card. And "best" varies from person to person.

User ID

dat2ra wrote:

Seems to me that the only "ethics" regarding post processing is if you claim you didn't when you did. The rest is all about rendering the "best" image from the data on your card. And "best" varies from person to person.

Amen. And no reason to claim you did or did not, anywho. Make no claim and just ignore the matter. No claims, no ethics. No harm, no foul.

Questions of ethics concerns real stuff that really matters.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

dat2ra wrote:

Seems to me that the only "ethics" regarding post processing is if you claim you didn't when you did. The rest is all about rendering the "best" image from the data on your card. And "best" varies from person to person.

Yep.

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

User ID wrote:

wrote:
Ethics definitely can be situational.

Below, please notice the pair of trash cans in front of the fence.

Given the two feet of snow, I found it more ethical to to leave them in place rather than move them.

JD750 wrote:

I agree with you. Definitely can be situational. In this case moving them would destroy the aesthetics of the fresh snow for both yours and others (if any) pics.

Obviously the ethical thing to do is remove them in post. That way, no new footprints in the snow and the next guy can decide on his own what to do. Even more ethical is to remove those fake foot prints in the snow, you know nature didn't put those in there.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

I have a confession. When on a recent hiking trip in the woods, I wanted a shot of a dandelion but there was stem in the frame. So I ripped it out. I realize the error of my ways now. :( Wantless destruction of nature. And someone else might have wanted that shot with the bare dandelion stem in it. I should have spent 2 hours in post removing it instead of 2 seconds ripping it out to get the shot. I hope I can be forgiven.

(Download)

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

JD750 wrote:

I have a confession. When on a recent hiking trip in the woods, I wanted a shot of a dandelion but there was stem in the frame. So I ripped it out. I realize the error of my ways now. :( Wantless destruction of nature. And someone else might have wanted that shot with the bare dandelion stem in it. I should have spent 2 hours in post removing it instead of 2 seconds ripping it out to get the shot. I hope I can be forgiven.

Great compositions 🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗

JD750 Loc: SoCal

joecichjr wrote:

Great compositions 🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗

Thank you Joe thats kind of you.

Interesting back story here is that wasn't as easy as it might seem. I could not have taken that with any of my Nikons. I used my OM-D with the flip out screen, and the camera was right on the ground, with the screen flipped forward so I could see it.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

BigDaddy wrote:

Obviously the ethical thing to do is remove them in post. That way, no new footprints in the snow and the next guy can decide on his own what to do. Even more ethical is to remove those fake foot prints in the snow, you know nature didn't put those in there.

Wow ❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️

User ID

BigDaddy wrote:

Obviously the ethical thing to do is remove them in post. That way, no new footprints in the snow and the next guy can decide on his own what to do. Even more ethical is to remove those fake foot prints in the snow, you know nature didn't put those in there.

And the hedge row shouldn’t be so evenly trimmed on top. Nature doesn’t grow it like that. Actually there should never be any photos of snow cuz nature would tell humans to live somewhere with a longer growing season so no humans would see or photograph snow. Etc etc etc ....

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

JD750 wrote:

I have a confession. When on a recent hiking trip in the woods, I wanted a shot of a dandelion but there was stem in the frame. So I ripped it out. I realize the error of my ways now. :( Wantless destruction of nature. And someone else might have wanted that shot with the bare dandelion stem in it. I should have spent 2 hours in post removing it instead of 2 seconds ripping it out to get the shot. I hope I can be forgiven.

I hear you however, whether the stem was removed in pre or in post, both are un-ethical to some.

In User-ID's photo removing the garbage cans in post took about as long as it would have to walk through the snow and move them somewhere. Then, you would still have to remove the foot prints to nowhere you left in the snow, making it 10 times harder to do in pre than in post. I'm not even sure it would be possible to remove those footprints, probably have to wait for more snow. I spent a total of <5 minutes removing both, and I didn't get my feet cold and wet in the snow.

Every situation is different, IE, situational ethics...

User ID

Y’know ... now that they’re gone, I kinda miss the trash cans with their cute little snowy winter hats .......

The lesson here is that what you do in pre may come back to haunt you but what do in post is readily reversible.

Acoarst none of that impacts the ethical question, but if the advocates of SOOC manage to pack the courts, you might be glad that your violations are of the easily reversible variety.