dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

For those wondering what is acceptable and ethical for natural landscapes in their photo post processing (excluding those in the business of creating abstracts or fine art prints), this set of rules on digital adjustments for a competition being presented by Natural Landscape Photography Awards may provide a very helpful guideline to follow.

https://naturallandscapeawards.com/rules/

machia Loc: NJ

Thanks for posting this.
Have a great weekend.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

It is known that a competition has rules and in the case of a competition about natural landscapes it is understood that landscapes should not be manipulated during editing beyond what is considered appropriate for slight enhancement of the RAW data. I have nothing against this.
Each one of us is different and we manipulate our images to our taste, be personal or artistic. I have nothing against that either.

In my case I could substitute a sky if I believe it will improve the image. It could take good eyes to tell the difference if the original is not shown. I never participate in competitions, never will.
Thank you for the link.

goldstar46 Loc: Tampa, Fl

goldstar46 Loc: Tampa, Fl

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Without reading it, it sounds like something to do with purism.
I process images making them the way I want them to look.
"Reality"?. Maybe, maybe not, literally.
But it's how "I" want them to look.

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

As I said...for those wondering...may provide a helpful guideline. Not trying to censor anyone's work here.

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

As I replied to camerapappi, for those interested...may provide a helpful guideline. Not censoring or advocating.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Understood.
As I mentioned (alluded to), perfectionists.

(Not so much poetic license.)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

I skimmed through. If I were entering their competition, I would appreciate the well written, concise rules that include visual examples of each point.

Otherwise, I'm all about individual pov's and interpretations/impressions. On forums such as UHH, I think it's educational to disclose changes such as sky replacements upfront so that comments don't become misleading when asked "what were your settings?"

edit - Ed Shapiro below has eloquently addressed ethics and "acceptability."

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

If you are entering a competition, you simply have to stick to the rules. If altering, eliminating or adding to any element to a landscape rendition is prohibited, it would be considered a breach of the rules set forth by the organization that is holding the competition. If you belong to an association that has such rules that apply to any contest submissions or considering submissions for a print show, etc, agan you need the adhear to those rules. If you personally agree with such rules, restrictions and which to apply to you personally, that is your choice and if you wish to join an association with like-minded folks, you can do so at your option.

If you are shooting for publications such as National Geographic you may be required to adhere to their editorial policies which may include such guidelines. Readers of these publications, naturalists, and environmentalists, would be interested in authenticity.

The organization that the OP posted in a link is primarily against post-processing alteration of landscape images. They did not, however, mention certain aspects of camera work such as perspective control and camera position as to points of view, all of which can also alter the appearance of any given scene.

I am careful with the word "ethics". It is unethical to submit an image to a contest or publication under false pretenses, that is representing an altered image as an authentic one. It is unethical to create an image that specifically abets false advertising (in commercial work).

As to any photographer's right to interpret a scene or anything else for strictly artistic purposes or self-expression is not dishonest or unethical. Some folks just like to impose or foist their approaches on everyone else and thereby create false ethics. That would be like classifying fictional literature as dishonest or unethical and only allow non-fictional textbooks.

It's up to y'all. Your photography can be documentary, fantasy, or anywhere in between. You are free to hook up with whatever group or association accommodates your philosophy and other requirements.

I belong to 4 different professional associations. Some have a code of ethics that entails treating clients with honesty and respect, always doing our best work, and maintaining fair, lawful and reasonable business policies. Some of these associations, however, develop a sub-culture or cult-like group that attempts to foist a particular style or approach to aesthetics and methodologies. This does not cause a bloody conflict but brings about stagnations and a philsosphy of smmeness.

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

👍👍👍
I did read some of it, but it is rules for a competition, and has little to do with how this stuff should be handled by you or I.
Even in this competition, the rules say what is acceptable will rest finally with the judges opinion. So much for rules.
There are other competitions where the more you alter a photo the better, and the main rule is to show the original to verify you really made alterations, like a new sky.

Nat Geo has a VERY limited audience, if they even remain in business?

goldstar46 Loc: Tampa, Fl

Ref: Landscape Post Processing (Title of This Post)

I have said this before and I will say it again...

"Photography" is, and will always be in a "State of Controversy" as to its definition and objective...

Each of us has our own opinion... AND, given the time, space, and objective - will mean many different things to many different people.

Old-School ~~ "Capture the exact moment as it existed when photographed..."
New-School ~~ "Make any changes you can, with whatever you have.. in order to Garnish Personal Praise"
AND... Yes, there are many, many, many gradations between the former and the latter...

In my opinion ~~ The "Rub" comes in the "lack of disclosure" & an artist should be "Honest" with the public.

One Must govern themselves according to their own desires, or they must be governed by Rules of Competition.

As for me... I do lean in the direction of "Tradition"...... and I will leave it at that.
... YES, each and every "Photographer" or "Graphic Artist" are entitled/empower to what they wish to do

*** My Humble Opinion Only.

Cheers
George Veazey
####

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

The point several seem to be missing is that the guideline refers to NATURAL Landscapes. I don't even bother to get heated up much any more when I see some daytime foreground with a Milky Way above since, on Facebook, people eat that stuff up. To me, it is ludicrous. I have had difficulty putting into words my sense of what degree of post processing makes a really nice landscape and this guideline set the parameters quite reasonably to me. I didn't see anything in it about no adjustments, adjustments are a necessary part of developing RAW. The other points about substitutions and composites are fair when competing in NATURAL Landscapes.

Maybe I am too jaded about 'real'. I had someone use a Milky Way image of mine from the Alabama Hills and composite it onto a daytime picture (which he did darken) of the ghost town Bodie. He didn't ask my permission and I have to wonder whether he has passed the image off as his own when he admitted he had never shot the MW. Where was his investment in travel expense, specialty lens, getting up at 2am, and post processing? When I admire someone's photography, I like to think that it really is theirs, and theirs alone.