To Photoshop or not to Photoshop ?

[Codebreaker]

I'm interested in getting opinions on whether or not modifying content of a landscape using say, Photoshop, is any different from setting up a shot and then moving leaves, branches or whatever before pressing the button.

In the link the first shot, Quiraing-1, is unmodified and shows the loch on the left just above middle. I found this distracting so cloned it out to get Quiraing-2.

What would you do?

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1P4...0Tm9n_j8iiUZSG

BTW: the BW shot is not serious but shows that an 8mm lens can get the tripod legs in shot.

Colin

[pschlute]

There are two questions here :

1. which is the more pleasing picture ?

2. is it ethical to remove something from a scene in PS ?

In my view I think the lock is too close to the edge of the frame and you were right to remove it.

The question about ethics ? You are making an image, you can do what you like as long as you don't claim this is an accurate representation of the scene from that viewpoint.

[DanK]

I entirely agree with Peter.

Painters don’t always include all they see in a scene and leave things exactly where they see them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[billtils]

Agree with Peter and Dan on cloning out the loch - I like the B&W so why not do the same with the tripod legs?

[Shadowman]

What you do with an image or a scene depends on your end use of the image, in most cases photoshop and/or cleaning a scene is expected and will be suggested if you don't, for other usages, such as submitting the image to a contest where rules of engagement are stated you wouldn't.

[Manfred M]

Your question is bordering on being philosophical...

1. If the shot is viewed as photojournalism, then this would not be allowed with one exception; cropping the image. I have discussed this with a long-time photojournalist and as strange as it may sound, the crop is legal while the retouch is not with one exception; using "classic" techniques like dodging and burning to downplay, but not eliminate the offending area. Cloning or use of one of the modern "content aware" tools are definitely not allowed.

2. If you are entering the image in a photo competition in the "nature" category, then the legs have to go (by any means, unless the rules prohibit this) because the tripod legs show the "hand of man" which would automatically disqualify the shot.

3. For anything else, it's your call. You need to decide what you want the final image to look like. If it were my image, I would definitely do something to downplay or remove the small lake.

P.S. The tripod purists will be up in arms as you should try to have the leg forward to give the most stable tripod position and reduce the risk of knocking into the leg that cannot be seen in the shot.

[billtils]

P.S. The tripod purists will be up in arms as you should try to have the leg forward to give the most stable tripod position and reduce the risk of knocking into the leg that cannot be seen in the shot.

[xpatUSA]

I'm interested in getting opinions on whether or not modifying content of a landscape using say, Photoshop, is any different from setting up a shot and then moving leaves, branches or whatever before pressing the button <>

Colin

Interesting thread. Long ago, I took some shots of a Cedar Tree Bole to decide a good angle. This one looked OK:



Then I removed all the stuff from the front and posted a night shot here and mentioned removing stuff in that post:



Was told that I shouldn't have done that. I took the view that, since the tree was on my property - as was the stuff - I could do whatever I liked with it. Ho hum.

No commercial or political aspects involved, just a demo of flash photography with an IR-sensitive camera, IIRC.

[Manfred M]

I'm interested in getting opinions on whether or not modifying content of a landscape using say, Photoshop, is any different from setting up a shot and then moving leaves, branches or whatever before pressing the button.

This is an practical and ethical question more than anything else.

If you move / remove branches and leaves and you do no damage to the environment, then this is no different than pushing a chair out of the background before taking a portrait.

If on the other hand you damage the habitat of some animal living on the branch, then this would be considered a bad thing to do. In wildlife photography, removing twigs and branches to get a good shot of a birds nest is viewed as being completely unacceptable.

In general, I have no issues pulling a branch out of the way to get a shot, so long as I am not disturbing bird habitat. I would not, on the other hand, cut the branch off. If it is a dead branch, I might be okay with it. I know of one well known nature photographer who has a small pair of scissors in his gear bag and will not hesitate to clip off an errant leaf here or there.

[Codebreaker]

Apologies for the late return to this thread I started as I've been travelling.

Thanks for all the replies and as with many such things the answer is 'it depends'.

Most of my shots are for my own use and I'll modifiy them under the guise of 'artistic interpretation'. If of course I need to submit one for a competition or whatever that has rules then they need to be obeyed.

[Codebreaker]

Just for the tripod purists

This shot was taken while I was on a rock strewn slope of about 45 degrees. Two legs forward was the best position for stability and I couldn't get behind the camera anyway and had to stand to one side between two of the legs, so no additional danger of knocking a leg.

Shot was taken solely with Live View 'cos I couldn't really see through the viewfinder easily.

[DanK]

I removed a person from this shot. I wanted the couple on the left as a compositional element and to provide scale. However, in between the two of them, there was a woman walking away from the camera, so in between the man and woman was a red blob from her sweater and a gray area from her pants. It took a little doing to make it look like she had never been there. It didn't (and still doesn't) strike me as an ethical issue in the least. It was no different in my mind than the extensive burning and dodging I had to do to make the image look like I wanted rather than like the original capture (except that removing the person was harder).

[lesuna]

I prefer a few editors
Movavi Photo Editor.
GIMP.
Paint.NET.
ACDSee.
Picasa
When I was a photographer at Korter.ae real estate company in UAE, I used Movavi. As for me it was the best option for editing photos of real estate projects. I flew to Dubai to photograph residential complexes, and it seemed to me that this program was suitable for processing photos of rooms and houses

[xpatUSA]

BTW: the BW shot is not serious but shows that an 8mm lens can get the tripod legs in shot.

Colin

My Sigma 8-16mm at 8mm also gets the supplied hood in the shot. And it's a push-fit, so not easy to come by something bigger.