Ban on Photo Manipulation (Page 7): WE know that, but does CVS know that? Or is this policy going to be applied by people who don't understand photography and just think that if it's...

TheDman Loc: USA

aschweik wrote:

Who care if CVS alters white balance or not? What we're talking about here is altering reality.

WE know that, but does CVS know that? Or is this policy going to be applied by people who don't understand photography and just think that if it's been in Photoshop, it must be labeled? Then every single image would be labeled, thus negating the effectiveness of the label, and you'd be back to square one.

Ted H. Funk

Total nonsense to your comments about Ansel Adams who was a Master Printer of his own photographs (I've seen an exhibit of many of those original prints) who knew how to bring out
the highlight & shadow areas in a print, giving a tremendous range of values from deep black to
pure white if he wished. That's professional darkroom technique at its finest, not digital manipulation, and to equate the two show you're just not well-informed but absurdly biased!

markmmmm

Ultimately in the name of fairness and to make us "truly" all the same, we will get to the point where a tiny chip is in all of us from birth. This chip will make us all identical in terms of looks, knowledge, personality and beliefs. We will no longer have any worry about folks not understanding that photographs are manipulated for advertising and other such matters. We will be programmed on what to purchase. We will also be programmed on being happy without any worry of competition and fear of life itself.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

markmmmm wrote:

Thirty some years ago when my kids were younger an... (show quote)

The point here is not "selling something" - the point is avoiding using images which will cause fragile egos to self-destruct - even those that show a strong face to the world {like Karen Carpenter, rip}

James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA

ToBoldlyGo wrote:

Audio is similar to film vs digital. The initial recording medium does make a difference to the final version you hear. I like to hear the tape hiss personally, I feel like there is less manipulation vs a noiseless background, of course assuming the hiss is from the initial recording. Just me though.

Ironically, those CD labels were the result of CD buyers feeling "duped" because the original source WAS analog tape on many CD releases. (Of course any pre 1980s recordings had to be that way any how) But, I do get what you mean about the intentional "noise" in analog recording. When I need "tape hiss" I record audio on physical audio tape then digitize to a lossless format for editing or copying. Even better, Last year I needed to make a video that looked like actual videotape Instead of using digital effects, I used an "old school" solution: lacking a Beta or VHS camcorder, I shot digital video at 640x480 burned that to DVD and recorded the DVD to a VCR - Finally pumped VCR output thru a capture card! Suddenly it's 1986! but now as an *mp4! What we won't do for art!

markmmmm

The chip will take care of all fragile people. Ultimately, we are heading there to eliminate fragile people, individual differences, and all pain. Life will be wonderful. Everyone will be the same.

BillFeffer Loc: Adolphus, KY

There is photography as documentation which is what ad photography should be and there is photography as art. I have made photos for use in a court of law. They must be an accurate representation of what they purport to be. I do most of my photography as art which is a visual interpretation of what I see in hope of evoking a pleasing response in the viewer.

ELNikkor

how about slide film that enhances colors?

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Ted H. Funk wrote:

Total nonsense to your comments about Ansel Adams who was a Master Printer of his own photographs (I've seen an exhibit of many of those original prints) who knew how to bring out
the highlight & shadow areas in a print, giving a tremendous range of values from deep black to
pure white if he wished. That's professional darkroom technique at its finest, not digital manipulation, and to equate the two show you're just not well-informed but absurdly biased!

Of course, it wasn't "digital manipulation" - it wasn't "digital" anything! - but in what way was it not
"manipulation"???

BillFeffer Loc: Adolphus, KY

There is photography as documentation which is what ad photography should be and there is photography as art. I have made photos for use in a court of law. They must be an accurate representation of what they purport to be. I do most of my photography as art which is a visual interpretation of what I see in hope of evoking a pleasing response in the viewer.

Dannj

[quote=dragonfist]I think that using a manipulated photo to show unobtainable results from using a product is fraud at best. This would be especially true as related to products concerning teenagers. They are at a vulnerable age concerning their image and how others perceive them and don't have the judgement of an adult. I have a feeling this is what CVS is trying to prevent.[/quote
Agree and think it's a good step. Photos that imply unrealistic results take advantage of the naivety of youthful customers. Fine print disclaimers don't work.
I think the CVS policy will extend to their suppliers' products in a few years as well.

TheDman Loc: USA

Darkroom317 wrote:

Dodging and burning change are hardly manipulation

Those are totally manipulation.

TheDman Loc: USA

Ted H. Funk wrote:

That's professional darkroom technique at its finest, not digital manipulation, and to equate the two show you're just not well-informed but absurdly biased!

They are exactly the same thing.

CyberDave Loc: Pennsylvania

[quote=yssirk123]So is it the OP's conclusion that because a pharmacy has adopted a new advertising policy it should be applied to all photography??? On the surface, that seems ridiculous.

Alarm bells go off for me when someone not only tells me their opinion, but then suggests that it should be applied to everyone else. When I see these kinds of threads pop up in photography forums, I often think many of the posters have neither the skills nor the inclination to acquire the skills necessary to post process their images.[/quot]
Greetings! Well said!!!
'CyberDave'

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

TheDman wrote:

Those are totally manipulation.

Of the negative yes but of the scene not so much.