When is image editing really image editing?

[TArnoldPhoto]

My friend and I where having an interesting discussion the other day.

He has a awesome photo of his, but what really makes it cool is that he used a red filter on his lense which really made it interesting.

When is image editing really image editing?

Are using different filters image editing? How about, some cameras have some effects like automatically stiching multiple images together, or making the photo black and white, is that image editing?

I beleive image editing isn't really image editing untill you have imported the picture into a seperate device other then the camera you took the picture with, and made changes to the context or changed the picture in any way. I also beleive changing the expsure or brightness in Photoshop or Aperture also makes it an edited image.

What are your thoughts?

[saravrose]

Loaded question and one that pops up every couple of weeks..
Personally I think that anything we do in the 'digital darkroom' to improve photographs is up to your personal tastes.. people do some crazy things to photos, doesn't mean that they are breaking some cardinal rule of photography.. it's all a matter of perspective and taste...

sari.

[Poco]

The image is edited as soon as you frame it in your camera, even before you press the shutter button.

All these arguments are silly. If you want to be genuinely pure then you should use a stick and blood to draw on cave walls. Anything else is cheating.

By your own argument, if I had a camera that pasted a clown face in the middle of every photo then it wouldn't be edited because the camera did it. Even your digital camera is editing every photo it takes. Even film is just a chemical interpretation of the light that was focused it.

The only thing that not editing a photo in Photoshop gives you is more time.

[Robert_Lay]

Originally Posted by TArnoldPhoto

My friend and I where having an interesting discussion the other day.

He has a awesome photo of his, but what really makes it cool is that he used a red filter on his lense which really made it interesting.

When is image editing really image editing?

Are using different filters image editing? How about, some cameras have some effects like automatically stiching multiple images together, or making the photo black and white, is that image editing?

I beleive image editing isn't really image editing untill you have imported the picture into a seperate device other then the camera you took the picture with, and made changes to the context or changed the picture in any way. I also beleive changing the expsure or brightness in Photoshop or Aperture also makes it an edited image.

What are your thoughts?

I agree with your definition. Very scientific and reasonable.

[Robert_Lay]

Originally Posted by saravrose

Loaded question and one that pops up every couple of weeks..
Personally I think that anything we do in the 'digital darkroom' to improve photographs is up to your personal tastes.. people do some crazy things to photos, doesn't mean that they are breaking some cardinal rule of photography.. it's all a matter of perspective and taste...

sari.

Dear sari,

All of that is true, and I agree with you, but that was not the question. The question was is it editing or not. No one suggested that editing is wrong, did they?

[Robert_Lay]

Originally Posted by Poco

The image is edited as soon as you frame it in your camera, even before you press the shutter button.

All these arguments are silly. If you want to be genuinely pure then you should use a stick and blood to draw on cave walls. Anything else is cheating.

By your own argument, if I had a camera that pasted a clown face in the middle of every photo then it wouldn't be edited because the camera did it. Even your digital camera is editing every photo it takes. Even film is just a chemical interpretation of the light that was focused it.

The only thing that not editing a photo in Photoshop gives you is more time.

I think that now we are splitting hairs. Most people would consider that "editing" takes place in the darkroom (digital or otherwise) - not in the camera. That's why it's called a camera - not an editor.

[slin100]

Originally Posted by TArnoldPhoto

I beleive image editing isn't really image editing untill you have imported the picture into a seperate device other then the camera you took the picture with, and made changes to the context or changed the picture in any way. I also beleive changing the expsure or brightness in Photoshop or Aperture also makes it an edited image.

What are your thoughts?

By this definition, shooting in RAW would be editing because the image cannot be rendered until imported into a RAW converter.

[Hellashot]

Originally Posted by TArnoldPhoto

My friend and I where having an interesting discussion the other day.

He has a awesome photo of his, but what really makes it cool is that he used a red filter on his lense which really made it interesting.

When is image editing really image editing?

Are using different filters image editing? How about, some cameras have some effects like automatically stiching multiple images together, or making the photo black and white, is that image editing?

I beleive image editing isn't really image editing untill you have imported the picture into a seperate device other then the camera you took the picture with, and made changes to the context or changed the picture in any way. I also beleive changing the expsure or brightness in Photoshop or Aperture also makes it an edited image.

What are your thoughts?

What difference does it make if the filter was physically applied to the lens or applied by the camera while processing the shot to its media card or if the image was opened on a computer and a plug-in filter was run on it? There is no difference.

Most people adjust exposure/brightness of digital images because the cameras have a difficult time with DR being able to capture what was really out there plus compared to the DR of film.

To me "editing" an image is removing a road sign, removing power lines, or removing an unwanted person out of the image. Everything else is just "developing" the image as you would in a dark room with film.

[Poco]

Originally Posted by Hellashot

To me "editing" an image is removing a road sign, removing power lines, or removing an unwanted person out of the image. Everything else is just "developing" the image as you would in a dark room with film.

Now here is a question... If you ask an unwanted person to get out of the shot before you take it is that not also editing the shot?

I think there are distinct advantages of doing the work ahead of time (remove the sign, kick the person, cut the power lines) rather than in Photoshop, but if the result is equal then what's the difference? To me the difference is hours of time that I don't spend sitting in front of my computer tweaking every last pixel. Trust me, I've done that, and now I try to expose and frame everything in the camera. Not because it is more genuine, but because it saves me time in my hobby.

I think it was Ansel Adams who said "You don't take a photograph, you make it".

Every photographer is an editor, it is just a matter of when and how.

[Robert_Lay]

Originally Posted by Poco

Now here is a question... If you ask an unwanted person to get out of the shot before you take it is that not also editing the shot?

I think there are distinct advantages of doing the work ahead of time (remove the sign, kick the person, cut the power lines) rather than in Photoshop, but if the result is equal then what's the difference? To me the difference is hours of time that I don't spend sitting in front of my computer tweaking every last pixel. Trust me, I've done that, and now I try to expose and frame everything in the camera. Not because it is more genuine, but because it saves me time in my hobby.

I think it was Ansel Adams who said "You don't take a photograph, you make it".

Every photographer is an editor, it is just a matter of when and how.

I think you make a good point there. However, think about the way they make movies on a movie set. All of the effort that takes place in filming is under the direction of a Director. He's the guy who decides what is in the scene and what is not. After the filming has been completed, they go into "editing", which is predominantly cutting out things that they really don't need. I doubt that anyone would call what the Director does as "editing", and likewise, I doubt that what the editing accomplishes would be called "directing".

Nonetheless, this is all just a play on words, and we're all just humoring the original poster with a lively discussion among friends.

[Poco]

Originally Posted by Robert_Lay

Nonetheless, this is all just a play on words, and we're all just humoring the original poster with a lively discussion among friends.

Indeed

[Jon, The Elder]

Editing ? - I do what I need to, in order to make my client look their best - clone out a zit = edit. If they like and buy, that is the end of that photo processing and on to the next.

[blue_max]

The arguement is simply about the definition of a word.

Choosing to point a camera at a scene is the beginning of a process. Lens choice and all the other steps all contribute, but it's only the definition of a word that dictates where you process stops and another starts.

Actually, is a person that buys a flat-bed scanner a photographer?

Graham

[tiziano]

When film pictures were edited in the dark room, nobody complained that the photographer was cheating, but most of the changes we often do in PS were already done in the dark room: cut the frame, adjust brightness and contrast and saturation, burn or dodge some areas....
Why we hear these complaints now? in my opinion, because there is no limit to what can be done to an image in the digital dark room.
I try to follow one rule: to apply, with PS, only the enhancements that, with much more work, could be done in a dark room. This means: no flying pigs!!!

[Hellashot]

Originally Posted by Poco

Now here is a question... If you ask an unwanted person to get out of the shot before you take it is that not also editing the shot?

Preparing your shot ahead of time is setting up the shot. Once it's been recorded digitally or on film and you take things out of the recorded frame - it's editing. You can ask someone to move or move the camera but you can't ask a pole or powerlines to move.

You can't "edit" something that does not exist yet. Editing is done after recording.