TheDman Loc: USA

Yet here you are doing it. Still waiting for the list of photographers not disclosing their processes.

oregonfrank Loc: Astoria, Oregon

I haven't said that any particular photographers have not disclosed their PP. What I have attempted to say is that I would like to see a way for photographers to routinely note especially extensive PP, preferably for individual images. I've made a couple suggestions as to brief phrases that could be used for this purpose. I've gathered that most who have responded disagree, so it appears to be a moot point?

bking3

For those of us who grew up in the Darkroom, we all know that post-processing is nothing new. Very few of Ansel Adam's famous prints were of the "actual" scene but rather a combination of multiple negatives dodged and burned into place. Photography is an art. Part of art is imposing your creativity on the images you're producing. The level of this imposition is clearly up the artist, and like all art is a matter of taste. I can assure you there are audiences for all types of work.

sujoncps Loc: Dhaka, Bangladesh

I just found few of them with your view.

rcdovala

I find it interesting that much of the discussion regarding this topic has centered on the post-processing that Ansel Adams performed in the darkroom. And that his dodging and burning was a departure from reality. But I don't believe that I have read a single thread that said that most of his work was in B&W and that in itself was a total departure from reality. The world is in color and his prints are in B&W. So, if Ansel can warp reality to that degree and not be criticised for it, why can't I add more saturation to make a print more colorful without taking heat? Why can't I print a portrait as a high key or a low key image without taking heat? After all, these interpretations are certainly departures from reality. Why can't I add clouds to a cloudless sky? This my image and I can do as I please with it. You are welcome to like it or not like it. That is your choice and your privilege. You are even welcome to criticise it. What you can't do is to impose what you perceive to be your standards on me. And you can't tell me what is ethically right or wrong for me. It is up to me to determine my ethical boundaries. So, I will continue to use all the layers in PS that are at my disposal. I will continue to add clouds to my blank skies and I will continue to turn noontime photos into sunsets. And I will hang them on my wall for my enjoyment. And if anyone asks me about my post-processing, I will share my techniques with them. If they don't ask, I will be silent.

oregonfrank Loc: Astoria, Oregon

I agree with every thing you said. What I don’t understand is what objection do you have to noting for the image you added clouds to an empty sky that that is one of the ways you enhanced it.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

No, No, No

Some photography is art. Some, such as that performed by photojournalists and those at the Olympics, is recording our world as it is, and then the photographer attempts to keep himself/herself out of the picture. My 'mission', of "recording my world as it is today, before tomorrow comes and everything changes" is close to photojournalism, so I choose to follow their standards.

TheDman Loc: USA

So you're mad at all the photographers that "don't disclose" their pp, but you can't name any of them. That makes sense.

pats

Well said!

TheDman Loc: USA

rcdovala: "if anyone asks me about my post-processing, I will share my techniques with them."
oregonfrank: "What I don’t understand is what objection do you have to noting for the image you added clouds to an empty sky that that is one of the ways you enhanced it."

????

oregonfrank here is really mad at a problem that exists only in his mind.

bobburk3 Loc: Maryland

...Well said.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Those impressionist, dadaists and abstract artists also soooo over-processed reality, which is why we all "KNOW" there stuff was crap. Yeah!!!! Down with Picasso, Van Gogh and Duchamp!!!!! The critics were right!!!

And down with all the art schools that teach that crap as if it was ground breaking and worth knowing about! Next we will be praising someone who painted,... oh i don't know... a... err.. a.... a... a can of Campbell's soup!!! Yeah, at least that will never happen!!! Can you imagine someone paying good money for a painting of a can of soup!???!! LMAO!

johnec Loc: Lancaster county, PA

After 17 pages of responses I can't imagine much more can be added to the discussion, but ...just my 2 cents worth... For myself, when I take a picture, I want the final product to represent exactly what my eye saw, "warts and all." On the other hand, the photographer who made my acne "go away" for my high school senior portrait was more a saint than a sinner.

PhotoKurtz Loc: Carterville, IL

Can the same be said of using flash or reflectors? or ND filters? or long lenses? (no, I didn't read the previous 17 pages of comments... sorry if this is a duplicate.) Lots of wasted rhetoric here... If you don't care for someone's interpretation just go on to the next page.

Angmo

Let’s pick on News Papers now. They report things with interpretation jaded by ideology. Is that factual news?

And pro wrestling.. fake or not?

:-)