An ethical dilemma.

[X-Warrior]

About erm *cough* 'post processing'.

I made the following shots:

http://www.dvdpimages.com/web/IMG_4973b.jpg

http://www.dvdpimages.com/web/IMG_4984b.jpg


All well and good I suppose, buuuuuut....

Here's what they really looked like after standard PP (brightness, contrast, colour balance, sharpening - the smart photo correction tool in PSPX2):

http://www.dvdpimages.com/web/IMG_4973.jpg

http://www.dvdpimages.com/web/IMG_4984.jpg


Well, you've noticed the difference by now I suppose. Yup, I forgot to wipe my watch clean of dust before shooting the pictures, and basically, it's worse than dust on my lens or sensor. As you can see, I've been rather 'creative' with the cloning tool.


Now, an ethical dilemma for you people...
What would you do ?

a) Stick with the dusty images. They're fine. Dust is interesting, and possibly even enhances the pictures.
b) Clone 'em out. The end justifies the means... really, it's not that bad to use cloning, could be a lot worse.
c) Wait until tomorrow 17:30 when you have about the same light conditions and do it right this time. That watch ain't going anywhere.

I think I'll pick option c.


C&C on the pictures would be most welcome.
But I also thrust upon you the question: what would you do ?
If you choose for c, then what would you do if you could not shoot the pictures again tomorrow ?

Let the flame wars begin! :p


Note: It's in the macro section because originally, this thread would be to show the pictures and try to get some C&C - results of tomorrow (if I get to it) will also be posted here.

[LordV]

Lovely shots esp the first one but hate to say it I'm having a hard time noticing any differences between the versions ?

Brian V.

[macro junkie]

i would go with C..if u have time to do it again why clone them out?if it was an insect and its almost impossible to get the shot again then cloning is fine but because u can do the shot any time just do it again..:)great shots by the way.

[chrisa]

Unless this is for photojournalism I wouldn't worry about it.


Chris.

[wannabegood]

Do it again, clean, show me more of that awesome Ti Chronograph!
<-----Ti Freak!
I agree with Macro Junkie, mostly cause it'd be hard to get the dust off the insects, they hate baths! Turbo jet maybe?

But seriously, I can't really tell the dif either, so the original's look good to me. I just started shooted some macro in the last week or so, and find that dust is a big issue! It's always something, isn't it?

PS: be sure to get all the shots you want in macro before you wear it too long, as Ti gets micro scratches when in use and it'll never look as good again!

[X-Warrior]

PS: be sure to get all the shots you want in macro before you wear it too long, as Ti gets micro scratches when in use and it'll never look as good again!

Hmmm... you know, when I bought the watch I paid for it in Dutch Guilders. Yes, that's before the Euro came into play. Guess how old the thing is :lol:
And no, I don't think I'm going to buy a new one just for the pictures :roll:

For those not seeing the differences:
- Left and right of the turning mechanism.
- Underneath the word 'chronograph'.
- Underneath the right half of the 12 o'clock mark.
- To the left of the 1 o'clock mark.
- On the lower part of the top-right stopwatch thingy, there's a fugly stain as well (dried up water probably), but it doesn't show very much in these particular pictures.


Thanks for the replies people - I hope I'll get some good ones tomorrow.


On a side note: I've also considered doing these kind of pictures with a wet watch. Drops may come out quite nicely given the proper lighting.

[dpastern]

I de-spot every image that I work on. I think you'll find most professional photographers do so as well. When DSLRs are dust free, then I'll stop.

I think you'll find that most photographers, including professionals, will "work" on the images in an image editing application as well, be it levels, contrast, hue/saturation, colour balancing, you name it. Just remember, camera WB settings are NOT accurate (although Nikon is far better than Canon in this respect imho), so you have an innaccuracy there.

As to "I'll reshoot tomorrow", sure - when I learn to talk to insects effectively and can make them reappear at the same time/place on another day!!!

Dave

[macro junkie]

I de-spot every image that I work on. I think you'll find most professional photographers do so as well. When DSLRs are dust free, then I'll stop.

I think you'll find that most photographers, including professionals, will "work" on the images in an image editing application as well, be it levels, contrast, hue/saturation, colour balancing, you name it. Just remember, camera WB settings are NOT accurate (although Nikon is far better than Canon in this respect imho), so you have an innaccuracy there.

As to "I'll reshoot tomorrow", sure - when I learn to talk to insects effectively and can make them reappear at the same time/place on another day!!!

Dave

yep me to..very shot is edited..upload to raw - contrast - brightness - upload to jpeg - noisewhere professional - clean up dust marks - sharpen - re size - upload

[X-Warrior]

Oh don't worry, I properly work on almost all my pictures as well. Usually limited to the aforementioned 'smart photo correction' tool in PSP. So very useful that feature.
Though the dust spots I mentioned weren't on the camera sensor, they were on the object in the picture. Then again, I have no doubt any serious pro, doing advert work for example (best category to compare these shots with I guess) would get rid of any inconvenience he found. Doesn't matter how he does it, just as long as it looks perfect.

As promised then, the results of the retry today. I washed my watch before this shoot and did my best to remove all the spots. Some I had rather difficulty with though. Nevertheless, these shots have not felt the cloning tool, and look a lot better:

http://www.dvdpimages.com/images/macro/IMG_4993.jpg

In fact, this one has only had USM applied to it. Guess the natural lighting wasn't too far off from what I like in an end result ;)

The next one came out overexposed (thanks to the big black area fooling the metering system I guess), but I could compensate mostly. Normally, I wouldn't have included it on my site, but it has something special:

http://www.dvdpimages.com/images/macro/IMG_5000.jpg

Check the image number. It's number 5000! That calls for a celebration :D

[DragonSpeed]

DOF and lack of refraction is WAY better on the second pic of the second set. The blur in "chronograph" kept drawing my eyes over to it.