Manipulation

[Ian]

When does a photograph become "Manipulated" ie Sharpened/lightened/darkened/cropped etc.etc. When using film, you recieved the photographs back "Out of the Camera" now who knows? Apart from Don and Foxy Bob who posted how the effect was created such as lighting, camera position etc. I have only seen one posting stating what enhancing has been carried out.
So my question is how many post "out of camera shots"

Ian

[Snowyowl]

This type of subject has been debated quite a bit. Manipulation as you call it or enhancement or whatever is part of digital photography. Digital in many ways is a new art form. I routinely make adjustments to images that I think can be improved. I wish that I was better at it because it's part of the fun. In my opinion, out of the camera shots are not superior to enhanced shots. There really isn't any point to being a purist and not using digital enhancements when needed. If enhancing helps, do it. Unless some unusual or interesting technique is used then I don't think that enhancements need to be mentioned routinely. Film pros did the same thing in their darkrooms, cropping, pushing development etc.
Just my perspective on the subject.

[wolfie]

And of course, don't forget, film/print was also extensively manipulated in the darkroom. It was just a little more difficult and time consuming then.

I find it rather strange that manipulation was carried out in the darkroom without question, but now that it can be carried out by almost anyone with a PC, questions are raised.

If you shoot Jpg, maniplution is carried out by the camera's onboard processor. often by the photographer adjusting the "Parameters" or just using the default settings.
If you shoot raw you have manipulate the data. Otherwise you would have no image.
Even if you leave the raw convertor on the default settings manipulation is carried out by the software.

So as I see it all images are manipulated to a lesser or greater degree.

So I would say no one posts an un-manipulated photo.

Although I have noticed on another forum with a worldwide annual competition where no "excessive" manipulation is allowed, on one of the winning images the sky had been totally replaced. http://community.dcmag.co.uk/forums/thread/202558.aspx

[greypoint]

Surely it depends on which you mean - 'processing' would perhaps be a more apt word for dealing with things like adjusting exposure/sharpness/wb etc. That is no more than getting the best out of the taken image. Manipulation would seem to imply things like adding a different sky or reflections or something more radical to a photo.

As Harry says, dark-room manipulation has always been practised. Its great when the weather and light are perfect, the sun is behind you and there are no extraneous artifacts messing an otherwise beautiful image and then, yes I would post it ex camera. Mostly however at least one parameter is against one and those of us with cheaper cameras suffer from erratic bias there too. Lastly I find the web-site software does some fading which often needs compensation.

If processing or manipulation is over-done or badly done, it usually shows and is counter-productive anyway

[sassan]

Originally Posted by Snowyowl

If enhancing helps, do it.

Wow Snowy, this needs to be written in gold and truly no one could said it any better.

Photography can be viewed as a branch of art in extension and simplified form of painting. Any effort making the end result either more beautiful, interesting or more realistic in eyes of the viewer is a successful effort.

Also apart from olden days changes in darkroom, please do not forget about the color filters, soft filters, reflectors and play with light, multiple exposures, etc. And I do not recollect any one of them was considered as cheating.

As Christ rightly said, I also view PPEA (Post processing enhancement / alterations) as spice and salt in the food. In right quantity it gives that unique taste to end result and if too much or too little, you know the rest...

Having said that Ian, I share with you that even now when a picture impresses me a lot first question I ask myself is; Is this camera fresh! or altered as if the answer should make any difference. I believe things will settle in no time and till then we will complete our process of acclimatization.

[robski]

Ian

Send your roll of film to a dozen different processing labs and your see a dozen different sets of results ranging from good to bad. Negative film has a wide latitude and is very forgiving. Positive~Slide film on the other hand is far less forgiving. The users of this film felt entitled to wear the badge "Correct out of the camera".

Those of us who have experienced the darkroom are used to controlling the image by cropping, burning, dodging, selecting grades of paper etc.

As already mentioned you will realise that all images are processed when you sit and think about it. Even in the digital world where two manufactures use the same sensor the results are different. Different algorithms used to produce the image file. You may even bring into account the different colours of lens coatings.

Personally I don't have the time or the inclination to spend hours editing images. Normally if an image needs more than five minutes to crop and tweak levels and sharpness then it's heading towards the trash can.

Mind you I'd be interested to see how steve produces his Hi-key images.

[Ian]

Thanks for the input Guys and Gal I am NOT against as Greypoint made clearer "processing" or manipulation come to that, I think what I wondered does anybody ever acheive shots only processed "in camera"

Ian

[greenbunion]

I spent 10 years in darkrooms printing black and white shots for all sorts of uses (exhibitions, shops, galleries etc) and can tell you that a massive amount of manipulation went on. Dodging, burning, pushing and pulling were used on EVERY shot. I have printed work by David Bailey and other names and had exhibitions at the Royal Photographic Society (with my handie-work never attributed!!!) and can safely say it was 10% original shot and 90% darkroom technique.

I would never upload a digital shot that hadn't had some "work" done to it, as it wouldn't be the best I could achieve. The original file is just the starting point.

[Canis Vulpes]

I am not familiar with flim darkroom procedures myself but take a look at Ansel Adams work. Shot using 1940's (or so) equipment the dynamic range and sharpness are equal if not better than todays equipment and procedures. It seems that throughout the years man has tried to emulate what the eye see's rather than what the camera records. Digital darkroom procedures may enhance the original photo but in my opinion never introduce something such as a foreign object. In portraiture it is common practice to remove wrinkles, blemishes and whiten teeth/eyes to improve the look of the subject.