Alteration of photos - is it cheating?

Status
Not open for further replies.

eipper

Very Well-Known Member
APS Veteran
there is definitely still a challenge in wildlife photography.......
 

Klaery

Well-Known Member
there is definitely still a challenge in wildlife photography.......

I go further and say there is still a challenge with any type of photography. Great photos are not created in photoshop and top wedding photographers are not paid the big bucks because they are good at post processing. Sure it is cheaper to get into now days but the pretenders don't last long.

Post processing is a finishing tool that all photographers need to develop in the same way that a cabinet maker needs the skills to finish a fine piece of furniture.
 

ronhalling

Very Well-Known Member
Yeah I agree, often have to adjust the brightness, contrast, do some cropping and some sharpening to bring the colours and edges in the pic out better, but I don't have any equipment to get the flash output right etc, usually just use a point and shoot digital cam on manual with certain settings that I rarely change.

I used to adjust the aperture etc when I was learning on a Canon Eos 3000, but you couldn't have many wasted shots back then when using film, so learnt how to try and get the shots right the 1st time, I've since forgotten alot of what I learnt on that cam.

Will be getting back into taking better macro's again soon and relearning how to, got a Pentax Kx and a ok cheap beginner lens for it that I couldn't use, only just got a adapter for the lens recently, months after getting the camera and lens.
The lens is a old Tamron SP 35-80mm CF macro with adaptall 2 type connection, it's manual aperture and zoom adjustment, it came with a Hoyo UV filter on it.

I still need to get a ring flash and some extension rings to improve the macro on the lens and to lengthen it's range, current is 1:2.5 at full extension, will down to 1:1.25 with a entension ring and change the range to 70-140mm and so on with each ring added.
My wife and I really like this lens, it's way clearer than the starter pentax 18-55mm lens the camera came with.

My father was a professional shutter bug for over 25 years and 1 of the tricks he taught me for getting the best out of your flash without have to worry about filters and and electronic softening devices was to use differing thicknesses of tissue paper to soften (split tissue) or more creative (add more tissue) does not take long with digital photography to get it right with a bit of practice at home and all it costs is a good quality packet of multi layer tissues, it is amazing the effects that can be created using this method whether it be with a point and shoot, DSLR with bayonet mount flash or stand alone flash. :) ................................Ron
 

critterguy

Active Member
Getting off topic, but
Thanks, yeah I know of that method and where to find how to make a flash box, just haven't been bothered to with the normal cam I use as it has crap shake reduction compared to my previous ones and my pics of critters are usually while hunting inverts, so I don't want to have to lug a stand around with me to fix that.

I will make a flash box for the Kx though as I'll be able to produce better quality images from it than the base model point and shoot digital I normally use, so it will be worth the trouble.
I'll try the tissue paper method for the normal cam though, thanks :)
 

gus11

Active Member
You will not find an imagine in any book, magazine or printed anywhere that isn't edited in some way these days. You will not win any serious photo comp without some editing, your putting yourself behind the 8 ball from the start. You might be happy knowing it wasn't edited but that won't get you anywhere competition wise. Some competitions you can edit the hell out of photos and still win...(yes i'm suggesting last years ANZANG winner was not legitimate).

I edit my photos, some more than others. I enjoy looking at my photos and if i think tweaking them improves them then i do it. everyone's photos look better post processing.
 

eipper

Very Well-Known Member
APS Veteran
Come on Gus he was 8ft from the osprey and spoonbill why don't you believe it....
 

andynic07

Very Well-Known Member
I do not edit any of my photos but that is because I don't really know how.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

CrazyNut

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't call it cheating. People edit there photos everyday, pretty much every photo in any magazine was edited at some stage or another. Personally I believe the less editing done the better anyway, edit a photo to much and you get a photo that looks literally unreal. I think leave editing to just removing sight blockers (leaves, grass etc), brightness and sharpness. Although if it was a competition, making your photo sharper might be considered cheating.
 

gus11

Active Member
Did you see his picture of the "baby dugite" and the duckling. It's a classic!
Did you read much of his web page, apparently he has a habit of going out at night to photograph sunrises and won't come back for days... Some very ridiculous stuff on there.
 

Klaery

Well-Known Member
Did you read much of his web page, apparently he has a habit of going out at night to photograph sunrises and won't come back for days... Some very ridiculous stuff on there.

Link? I am out of the loop on this one. Have noooo idea who you guys are talking about.
 

BrownHash

Well-Known Member
The photograph and photographer can be found here. It is the ANZANG 2013 winner, which created some controversy regarding the photo and whether or not it is a composite photo. To add fuel to the fire it was later found that the photograph did not meet the criteria for the ANZANG competition by having been entered in, and winning, other photography competitions.

The South Australian Museum released this statement regarding the photo.

He also has his work displayed at The Open.

Since receiving criticism for some of his photos he has removed them from his web site, notably the photograph he had of a dugite swimming up to a duckling. The dugit was an adult, but the duckling was considerably larger.

He does have some very nice photographs, however I feel that the photo that won the ANZANG prize wasn't worthy of it and didn't comply with the terms of entry. I feel that it has tarnished the competition somewhat.
 

Klaery

Well-Known Member
Oh yes, I saw 'Australian story' on that fellow. Thanks for the explanation :) Actually didn't know much about the ANZANG. Some magnificent work in there.
 
Last edited:

jedi_339

Well-Known Member
Been away for a few day, but thanks for all the responses guys, some great insight into the topic.

AndyNic, I was and sort of still am in the same boat as you with not really knowing how to edit photos properly, I just tried to tinker with the saturation a little bit for the comp entry which made the colours a bit brighter. I was put onto a program called fast stone image viewer which seems to give plenty of easy editing options.

I was particularly interested in the ANZANG competition winners photo too. When I saw it on display in Adelaide I thought it looked a bit too good to be true.
I also liked the photo of the spoonbill taken at 2am on a full moon. The clarity of the moving droplets of water should surely defy the level of available light at the time. Just my thoughts.
 

Mitella

Active Member
The only thing I will ever do to my photos is enhance or brighten/darken them.
I think it's ok.
 

Red-Ink

Very Well-Known Member
Been away for a few day, but thanks for all the responses guys, some great insight into the topic.

AndyNic, I was and sort of still am in the same boat as you with not really knowing how to edit photos properly, I just tried to tinker with the saturation a little bit for the comp entry which made the colours a bit brighter. I was put onto a program called fast stone image viewer which seems to give plenty of easy editing options.

I was particularly interested in the ANZANG competition winners photo too. When I saw it on display in Adelaide I thought it looked a bit too good to be true.
I also liked the photo of the spoonbill taken at 2am on a full moon. The clarity of the moving droplets of water should surely defy the level of available light at the time. Just my thoughts.

Rules says, saturation can be altered as a whole, technically still a true representation on the subjects "form", behaviour and phenomenon. It does say "limited" though. ANZANG comp winner... fine line in deed there?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top