Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] image manipulation, digital or otherwise

Subject: Re: [OM] image manipulation, digital or otherwise
From: Gregg Iverson <giverson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 00:59:53 -0500

Joseph wrote:
> 
> regarding image manipulation...
> 
> If you are making an image as art, you don't have to say how you made it.
> 
> If you are claiming an image is nature photography, it is unethical to
> manipulate the image and pass it off as a nature shot-- it should be
> labelled as manipulated nature image.
> 
> The same goes for photojournalism.  If you claim something is a candid,
> then it should not be posed.  If you claim that an image is a piece of
> news or a capturing of an event, then it should not be manipulated to
> something which is not an accurate representation of the person or event.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> On the other hand, nobody cries foul when a nature photographer uses
> an orange filter for a color image of a sunset.

I do.  Actually, I am less likely to "cry foul" than to just turn away. 
I don't like filters that change what was actually there.  I don't
complain if a filter is used to compensate for the film's inability to
portray a scene as the human eye can see it.  I will even allow for
manipulation that allows for changing the contrast range, after all,
what film can come close to the human eye in that.

I do believe photography is art, and if a photographer wants to be
creative, so be it.  I just don't usually care for it.

Gregg

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz