Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] was Ansel, Now Manipulation Ethics
From: "SonC (Sonny Carter)" <sonc@sonc.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 14:34:15 -0500
References: <20020423184304.70410.qmail@web21403.mail.yahoo.com>

From: "Henry Ting"

> Cameras, films, enlargers, developers, darkroom
> manipulations are all tools for photography. Just like
> a painter with brush, canvas and paint. They all
> started with a clear sheet of blank medium. So why
> photography has to be rigidly controlled as to what is
> ethical or not.

Henry, I think we are in agreement here.

I am not talking about news events here, but in the world I inhabit,
if I take a picture of a building, I want to show the building, not as
Bell South and the Utility company would have me see it, with light
poles and transformers and power lines draped across the front; but as
the architect wanted his creation to be seen.

So, I am likely to PS the hell out of the picture to get it so that
you see it as a building.  You see, the casual viewer is apt to look
past the utility stuff when they see it in person, but when they see
it presented in 2-D, it is flattened across the face of the building.
Most people can't see past that, so I help them see with Photoshop.

Some of the criticism I've seen on pictures here  deals with
background or foreground objects drawing the eye away from the main
point.  Most of us don't work in studios, and even the one guy who
does,  broke out and then was criticized for:
A) Background Clutter,
B) Using a special effect.

The truth is that the focus of that shot was unmistakable.

It is extremely hard to get natural shots that work, without some
distracting influence.  If I can reduce the distraction, I will.  Some
shots seem perfect.  I know that the moment I've pushed the button,
but there is always something you can do to improve it.  Others take a
little more work.  Some take a lot more work.

Can you believe what you see in a SonC shot?  Absolutely.  You can
believe you are seeing it as I envisioned it.  You can believe that I
probably cropped it, most definitely messed with the levels, adjusted
the color balance, spotted it, and maybe even took a surveyor's stake
out of the shot.

Does that make the producer of the shot unethical?  Not in my world.
I drag my cameras out there week after week.  I shoot the picture, I
get the film processed,  scan the negs, and finish the pics, post them
on my site.  The least investment of time for any posting has been a
couple of hours, and that was when they were nearly perfect out of the
camera.
;>D

Regards,

Sonny
http://www.sonc.com
















> --- Eric <ericm@pobox.com> wrote:
> > B.D.:
> >
> > >it's okay to manipulate the bejayzus out of an
> > image...as
> > >long as you do it in the darkroom? ;-)
> >
> > I don't believe it ethical to do any manipulations
> > beyond that which
> > presents the photo as the photographer envisions it,
> > regardless of whether
> > done in the darkroom or in photoshop.  :)
> >
> >
> > Eric
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see
> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
> http://games.yahoo.com/
> --
> To unsubscribe, see
http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Henry Ting <henryting10@yahoo.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Ansel Adams on PBS TV)