Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 10 Sep 2017 (Sunday) 19:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

is processing cheating?

 
-Duck-
my head is usually in the way
Avatar
1,468 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 407
Joined Apr 2016
Location: Shelton, CT USA
     
Sep 18, 2017 20:24 |  #136

photosbytw wrote in post #18455197 (external link)
[...] she got very upset when we suggested she not point the camera towards the sun.

My turn to pass liquids through my nose. This is too funny.


"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Unitas Photography (external link)Blog (external link)Facebook (external link)Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
NCSA197
Goldmember
Avatar
1,131 posts
Gallery: 103 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1664
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Western NY State
     
Sep 23, 2017 17:52 |  #137

How the image looked "in the camera", and then how he wanted it printed and how he wanted us to see it. Finishing an image using whatever technology is available does not seem to be cheating at all.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,832 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 4875
Joined Oct 2009
     
Sep 23, 2017 19:13 |  #138

I'm a big Ansel Fan. Owned 4 by 5 field camera. Read all his books, applied the zone system and try to document that and all the darkroom procedures regarding processing times for various films and papers. Was that man ever meticulous. Went to his show in Toronto several years ago and there was a poster sized original of Moonrise. I asked if they would take a a check and the response was it is priceless.

In January of 2015 we went to Hernandez and found the church. It was hard to find. Too bad that there is no marker of any kind to show where one of his most famous shots was taken. Very cool experience both for my wife and I.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alright12
Hatchling
7 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2017
     
Sep 23, 2017 21:49 |  #139

I'm not a fan of post-processing, but I think it is not in any way cheating as you are just compensating for what your camera cannot do.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
7,625 posts
Gallery: 515 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1418
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Sep 24, 2017 15:39 |  #140

alright12 wrote in post #18459027 (external link)
I'm not a fan of post-processing, but I think it is not in any way cheating as you are just compensating for what your camera cannot do.


I don't see it that way. It is not compensating for what the camera can't do at all. The exposure is just the first step in the process, and I will always try to optimise the exposure to produce the perfect starting point for the next stage, processing the exposure to produce the optimum file or negative for the final stage of producing useable output, be that a finished JPEG file for viewing on a screen, or the perfect print. At each stage you are looking to produce the best possible starting point for the next stage in the process. It really helps of course if you have all of the steps there in your head before you even pick up the camera.

Remember that it has never been possible, and I doubt very much if it will ever be possible to create a photographic image without some degree of processing after the command to capture the image has been given. In the analogue age you had the option to do all the processing yourself, or you could drop the fim in to some place that would do it for you. In the current digital age the same still applies, although you now actually get a little choice in the automated process. By choosing the Picture Style, in a Canon DSLR, along with the other adjustable parameters, you are in fact controlling your post processing. The major difference is that those decisions are being made in advance, and often without too much consideration of the overall results. I'm sure many, or probably the majority of camera owners/users never change any of the cameras processing parameters from the factory defaults.

Actually when you dropped off a roll of film at a lab there is a person, or possibly an automated system that will check the negative and adjust the printing stage for you to try to get you the best results from the exposure that you made. That is the one step that you seem to lose with digital imaging straight from the camera, using the preset settings, when the resulting JPEG file is expected to be the final product.

So just remember that to get any image out of a camera pretty much requires a set minimum amount of post exposure processing. All that varies is the amount of control that the photographer exerts over that process.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
welshwizard1971
Goldmember
1,317 posts
Likes: 906
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southampton Hampshire UK
     
Sep 24, 2017 16:36 |  #141

BigAl007 wrote in post #18459507 (external link)
Remember that it has never been possible, and I doubt very much if it will ever be possible to create a photographic image without some degree of processing after the command to capture the image has been given. In the analogue age you had the option to do all the processing yourself, or you could drop the fim in to some place that would do it for you.

There's always an exception to every rule.....

Polaroid :)


5DIII, 40D, 16-35L 35 ART 50 ART 100L macro, 24-70 L Mk2, 135L 200L 70-200L f4 IS
Hype chimping - The act of looking at your screen after every shot, then wildly behaving like it's the best picture in the world, to try and impress other photographers around you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
-Duck-
my head is usually in the way
Avatar
1,468 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 407
Joined Apr 2016
Location: Shelton, CT USA
     
Sep 24, 2017 18:45 |  #142

welshwizard1971 wrote in post #18459538 (external link)
There's always an exception to every rule.....

Polaroid :)

Ah, but if you remember, there is a lot of post exposure manipulation you could do to a polaroid before the image set in. Those few minutes when the emulsion was soft it could be manipulated with any hard or stiff object. Spoons were popular as were pencils, pen caps (the Bic stick type), coins, finger nails, etc.


"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Unitas Photography (external link)Blog (external link)Facebook (external link)Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HogansHeroes
Goldmember
Avatar
1,925 posts
Gallery: 86 photos
Likes: 391
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Iowa
     
Sep 24, 2017 19:28 |  #143

Not at all cheating,Photography is a form of art. Take a photo and do something special with it is not at all cheating its Artistic.


"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop."
-Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
-Duck-
my head is usually in the way
Avatar
1,468 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 407
Joined Apr 2016
Location: Shelton, CT USA
     
Sep 24, 2017 19:30 |  #144

BigAl007 wrote in post #18459507 (external link)
I don't see it that way. It is not compensating for what the camera can't do at all. The exposure is just the first step in the process, and I will always try to optimise the exposure to produce the perfect starting point for the next stage, processing the exposure to produce the optimum file or negative for the final stage of producing useable output, be that a finished JPEG file for viewing on a screen, or the perfect print. [...]

But there is a lot of compensation for what a camera can't do. For instance, a camera cannot capture the same dynamic range our eyes can see in high contrast situations. There is post processing to compensate for that. The camera does not have the same low light capabilities our eyes have. There is post processing compensation for that. The camera doesn't have the same ability to capture saturation of color in high contrast situations or when there is heavy atmospheric influences. There is post processing compensation for that as well. That's not even getting into more technical aspects of photography where the camera is set up to push beyond our eye's capabilities. Infrared and ultraviolet photography requires post processing. If we want to get even further out from our consumer products, there are x-ray cameras, gamma camera (aka y-camera or anger camera), temperature sensing cameras, spatial mapping and sensing cameras, and who knows what else that's available now or the near future.

Then there is the question of the ability of the photographer. Someone who nails an exposure every single time may not need to correct for a bad exposure in post. I'm not that good and I occasionally need help correcting minor exposure differences, specially when shooting events and the action is happening faster than I can compensate for. There is no redo in those situations and correcting for human error is a must. Is that cheating? Not everyone has the luxury of taking their time, experimenting with the scene and fine tuning (throwing away) exposures until it's perfect in camera.

The issue with (standard) photography is that the resulting images are compared to what our eyes can see. Sadly there are yet no cameras that can fully reproduce what we see. Shallow field of focus is one example of how we have come to terms and accepted a limitation of the camera. So much so that it has become an affect that is manipulated for artistic reasons. Long focal lengths, on the other hand, is an example of how the camera has overcome a limitation of the eye.

As mentioned earlier by several people, this will forever be a question with no singular answer. Photography spans too many disciplines and are used for too many things to have one single answer. A photojournalist has one set of criteria while a landscape photographer has another. A commercial photographer will have a third set of criteria while the cellphone blogger will have a fourth and we're not even touching in astrophotography, cellular photography, scientific photography, geological photography, satellite photography and all those countless specialty fields.


"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Unitas Photography (external link)Blog (external link)Facebook (external link)Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
-Duck-
my head is usually in the way
Avatar
1,468 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 407
Joined Apr 2016
Location: Shelton, CT USA
     
Sep 24, 2017 19:33 |  #145

HogansHeroes wrote in post #18459630 (external link)
Not at all cheating,Photography is a form of art. Take a photo and do something special with it is not at all cheating its Artistic.

Not all photography is art, as I stated above. Then there are levels of artistic license too. A photojournalist can't do something special with it and get away with it. Neither can an x-ray technician and they are both photographers.


"If you didn't learn something new today, you wasted a day."
Unitas Photography (external link)Blog (external link)Facebook (external link)Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
renaissance_myth
Senior Member
Avatar
719 posts
Likes: 754
Joined Nov 2012
Location: Singapore
     
Sep 25, 2017 03:19 |  #146

panicatnabisco wrote in post #18453872 (external link)
processing has been done since the dawn of time

https://petapixel.com …c-prints-edited-darkroom/ (external link)
QUOTED IMAGE


Very interesting article. Thank you.


"Dear God, please let me master light"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,690 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 374
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Sep 25, 2017 07:46 |  #147

panicatnabisco wrote in post #18453872 (external link)
processing has been done since the dawn of time

https://petapixel.com …c-prints-edited-darkroom/ (external link)
QUOTED IMAGE

And keeping a notebook on how a particular print was dodged, burned, toned, et cetera, yeah, boy.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,832 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 4875
Joined Oct 2009
     
Sep 25, 2017 09:38 |  #148

I was a member at an online photo contest for several years. Digital Image Cafe. I was a judge for a month once a year. There were several categories and one was digital art. For the other categories the rules (that were strict) stated that some editing was permitted but it had to look like natural. So stuff like curves, levels, some local editing. HDR was just becoming popular but you could easily tell if it was overcooked.

Digital art was a free for all. Surreal images that some spent hours creating. They were obvious wild manipulations.

As some have stated we see in more dynamic range than our cameras. Our eyes look at a landscape for several seconds and adjust. The curtains open in less than a second. So like I said I have never seen any issues with some basic edits to boost DR, colours adjustments, etc. I also took a few PS courses and one instructor said if you do anything at least use levels. We learned how to adjust the black and white points individually.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_311
Checking squirrels nuts
3,758 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 541
Joined Mar 2011
     
Sep 30, 2017 14:33 |  #149

photography is a way to show someone else how you see the world.

embrace editing.


Canon 5d mkii | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
Olympus EPL7 | Panasonic 20/1.7 | Olympus 45/1.8
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JessicaJones215
Member
Avatar
34 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Sep 2017
     
Oct 02, 2017 11:23 |  #150
bannedPermanent ban

Nope.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

37,781 views & 110 likes for this thread
is processing cheating?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is HBGPhotos
758 guests, 457 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.