PDA

View Full Version : Actual photographs or images created by tampering with the original?



dwhitlow
24-07-2015, 03:50 PM
I have recently had people complaining I publish pictures of what I see, rather than fiddling with the 'white balance' or adjusting the image on my computer.

I prefer to see what it actually looked like, rather than spending time creating a new image that looks nothing like what I actually saw.

This was the image in question which I presented unmodified

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac285/dnw_bucket/IMG_4850_zpsd80pqt4c.jpg

Paul Evans
24-07-2015, 03:53 PM
All these, SO CALLED!! photographers??

Coat on........ Out the door :giggle:

purple vonny
24-07-2015, 04:09 PM
I'm a rather shit at taking photos, I do it for fun, so I fiddle with photos in lightroom. I do use white balance and use a strobe but even so, Lightroom just titivates them a bit. If it needs a lot of titivating, it was not a good photo. You can't polish a t**d.

purple vonny
24-07-2015, 04:11 PM
I have recently had people complaining I publish pictures of what I see, rather than fiddling with the 'white balance' or adjusting the image on my computer.

.

One person, Dave, one person.

And when you shine your torch on something, it's not green. I love your photos, they make me smile!!

londonsean69
24-07-2015, 04:14 PM
A photo is not reality, so why try to represent exactly what was there?

I shoot images that I would want to look at, and I don't want to look at snotty vis and washed out colours**

Pressing the shutter button is not the first step in the process, and it's certainly not the last :)

**I'm not saying yours are like this, I've never seen them.

Jackdiver
24-07-2015, 04:21 PM
Quite often what the camera records and what I remember seeing don't match, so I use Lightroom to adjust things closer to what I remember.

nickb
24-07-2015, 04:31 PM
Quite often what the camera records and what I remember seeing don't match, so I use Lightroom to adjust things closer to what I remember.Can you make the Stanegarth look like the USS Saratoga?

dwhitlow
24-07-2015, 04:37 PM
A photo is not reality, so why try to represent exactly what was there?

I shoot images that I would want to look at, and I don't want to look at snotty vis and washed out colours**

Pressing the shutter button is not the first step in the process, and it's certainly not the last :)

**I'm not saying yours are like this, I've never seen them.
I added one to the first post if you feel like 'improving' it.

dynarob
24-07-2015, 04:56 PM
I added one to the first post if you feel like 'improving' it.

Here you go :)

http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh271/dynarob/WhitlowImprovedPic%20copy_zpsx553yg9q.jpg

BTS
24-07-2015, 05:02 PM
I wasn't complaining Dave. I was taking the Piss in leau of your moan not so long ago about macro shows on the viz page...

Even before digital photography post processing was normal amongst the pros and semi pros... now anyone can make adjustments.

White balance is usually done on the camera before the shot is taken though it can be done after on the pc.

You carry on, if what you see is as blurry as your shots maybe it is time for prescription lenses 😉

dwhitlow
24-07-2015, 05:03 PM
One person, Dave, one person.

And when you shine your torch on something, it's not green. I love your photos, they make me smile!!
There have been more than one and I changed my olde Fuji F11 to a Canon S110 so I could get RAW and fiddle. However, to get RAW I need to set lots of other things, rather than using AUTO, and I want to be a diver with a camera and not an underwater photographer and Lightroom requires more commitment than I am willing to invest.

However, I thank you as you've told me I am achieving what I intend as making people smile is more important to me than creating the best image ever :)

dwhitlow
24-07-2015, 05:09 PM
I wasn't complaining Dave.

:OMG: that is almost an apology from BTS and I never once demanded it!!


I was taking the Piss in leau of your moan not so long ago about macro shows on the viz page...

I know and the poll is only partly serious. I trust you noted the closeup (untampered) sqidge image in the last post just to make the claim plausible ;)


Even before digital photography post processing was normal amongst the pros and semi pros... now anyone can make adjustments.

White balance is usually done on the camera before the shot is taken though it can be done after on the pc.

You carry on, if what you see is as blurry as your shots maybe it is time for prescription lenses ��
Thank you, I will :)

Mikael
24-07-2015, 05:46 PM
Here you go :)

http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh271/dynarob/WhitlowImprovedPic%20copy_zpsx553yg9q.jpg

Speaking of copyright, the two figures look awfully familiar.....
:P:

Logun
24-07-2015, 08:08 PM
i take the photo and if its any good use it if not i dont waste my time performing a process that ultimately i dont understand how to perform and ends up being a lot of thrusting with a pointy object into dark places.

Capt Morgan
24-07-2015, 11:30 PM
The photo's grand Dave, you can only work with
what you have and you have Peter ;)
The image looks natural to me, typical UK diving.
Apres dive is for the pub not the editing suite.

AndrewRawlingson
25-07-2015, 02:13 AM
For most of us, underwater photography is just a bit of (expensive) fun. I can't get worked up about what people do or don't do with their photos. Personally, I want to produce nice images and will happily spend quite a long time editing one photo. However, I hate the over-processed look and as other's have said, you can't polish a turd.

Divemouse
25-07-2015, 04:42 AM
Ionly use mine for ID, so might turn the contrast up to pick things out, but that's about it.

Pete Bullen
25-07-2015, 06:23 AM
I edit all my images and take an average of under 10 seconds to do it. I don't have the time or inclination to spend hours tweaking a shot and I can't be arsed to spend ages removing back scatter so mostly I try to get strobe position right. I also WB on the computer, it's one less task underwater. But I shoot RAW and without the sort of processing the camera tries to apply when creating a JPEG they would look flat. Here is the same shot before and after edit. Only things changed are WB, Contrast, Highlights, Shadows and Clarity. Took me 5 or 7 seconds.
Before edit
http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm243/petebalkan/YD%20Before-7220291.jpg (http://s298.photobucket.com/user/petebalkan/media/YD%20Before-7220291.jpg.html)

After edit
http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm243/petebalkan/YD%20AFter-7220291.jpg (http://s298.photobucket.com/user/petebalkan/media/YD%20AFter-7220291.jpg.html)

Hot Totty
25-07-2015, 06:38 AM
First is more atmospheric imho Pete

bazmattaz
25-07-2015, 10:53 AM
"You can't polish a turd" Nope, but you can roll it in glitter ;-)

Personally I'm not a good enough diver or photographer or editing suite user to be able to put too much into getting the nicest pics. At the moment I am content with producing something that reminds me of what I have seen and perhaps gives my friends a bit of an insight into our underwater world - maybe one day I'll get one of them interested in joining us down under.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Find me on Twitter if you like @BazMattaz

Decosnapper
25-07-2015, 12:04 PM
I think there has to be a new definition of what it is to create something with a camera.

Do you take photographs?
Or do you create an image?

The difference between the two is vast.

BTW Pete, the second image looks very wrong...

Tim Digger
25-07-2015, 01:43 PM
Sorry I agree too Pete. But the original needs a little lift on the diver and the dark walls. Just not that much and the original white balance is spot on. Bloody good shot though.

Pete Bullen
25-07-2015, 06:59 PM
oh well :D

String
16-02-2016, 03:49 PM
A big problem here is that pretty much all digital cameras are incapable of recording what YOU see. The various systems inside them, the way they deduce what colours are, the dynamic range etc means simply pressing a button just has an electronic best guess interpretation about what it thinks is there not the real image.

There is no such thing as a non-processed JPG - the variable is whether a human or a software engineer who writes camera firmware does the processing.

ScubaHogg
16-02-2016, 05:05 PM
I have recently had people complaining I publish pictures of what I see, rather than fiddling with the 'white balance' or adjusting the image on my computer.

I prefer to see what it actually looked like, rather than spending time creating a new image that looks nothing like what I actually saw.]

Your picture, your choice. If others do not like it, they can always look somewhere else.

purple vonny
16-02-2016, 05:25 PM
I've just seen the resurrection of this post. The best photos I ever took in my life were those taken with my old film camera - a Sea and Sea MX5 or 10... I don't remember. It had a pop up strobe on a stick sort of thing. You didn't know what was on the photos until you picked them up from Boots. (There are other photo processing companies :) )

I have some photos of clownfish framed that are sublime and no amount of digital photography and tampering can match those beauties. And all I did was aim - shoot - and got lucky. I think the same applies to a lot of photos. But expensive kit in the hands of a clever photographer does create some good results. Ho hum. I just got in from work and had some wine. It's not even 17:30 yet. Happy days.

Tim Digger
17-02-2016, 01:16 PM
The question is not whether you process but how much and how much control you want of that process. All photographs digital or film are processed images to a greater or lesser extent. The difference is how much control of that process you are happy to leave to a processing house or a software engineer. Pete B and I have just been playing with one of my wreck shots from Truuk that he was kind enough to make encouraging noises about, we both seem to have slightly different views of how think it should be.

Pete Bullen
17-02-2016, 04:23 PM
The question is not whether you process but how much and how much control you want of that process. All photographs digital or film are processed images to a greater or lesser extent. The difference is how much control of that process you are happy to leave to a processing house or a software engineer. Pete B and I have just been playing with one of my wreck shots from Truuk that he was kind enough to make encouraging noises about, we both seem to have slightly different views of how think it should be.

Time for another poll. Put up your edit and mine and see if A) folk can tell the difference and B) if they can which they prefer :D

Stevie H
17-02-2016, 04:40 PM
I'm very late to this thread but, my 2p....

Many eons ago in the age of film photography I spent a couple of years as the Regimental Photographer of the 1st Bn Grenadier Guards (so you may have seen some of my pictures).

Almost every image was "adjusted" in the darkroom before the final prints came out. Now while I'm not such a great fan of all that can be done in photoshop and lightroom, what can be done there is not so different from the cropping and shading etc that I used to do with film. So yes, I use photoshop :)

Tunicates
17-02-2016, 04:56 PM
Time for another poll. Put up your edit and mine and see if A) folk can tell the difference and B) if they can which they prefer :D

Gives me an idea for a photo editing competition, which could either be a real eye opener or could just fizzle depending on peoples responses.

Someone posts a picture that needs....something. Could be underwater or not. Could be a complete turd, could be almost perfect.
People then post their versions of a post-edit and we have a poll to find a winner, who posts a new picture.

Seeing as how relevant photo editing is in a digital age I think it might be worthwhile.

dwhitlow
17-02-2016, 05:48 PM
Gives me an idea for a photo editing competition, which could either be a real eye opener or could just fizzle depending on peoples responses.

Someone posts a picture that needs....something. Could be underwater or not. Could be a complete turd, could be almost perfect.
People then post their versions of a post-edit and we have a poll to find a winner, who posts a new picture.

Seeing as how relevant photo editing is in a digital age I think it might be worthwhile.


Feel free to use the image in post #1 :)

Pete Bullen
17-02-2016, 06:30 PM
Feel free to use the image in post #1 :)

Do me a favour, it has to have a chance of being polished :D ;)

dwhitlow
17-02-2016, 06:41 PM
Do me a favour, it has to have a chance of being polished :D ;)
:P:

Tim Digger
17-02-2016, 06:53 PM
Time for another poll. Put up your edit and mine and see if A) folk can tell the difference and B) if they can which they prefer :D

OK Here are my edit produced as a jpeg 1000pixels widest 250pixel/cm and the original as the same export. For those interested 1/30th ISO800 f6.3 11mm Tokina 10-17 (11mm to avoid vignette) No flash.
http://i1127.photobucket.com/albums/l625/TimDigger/so%20Stuff/poll1-1282.jpg (http://s1127.photobucket.com/user/TimDigger/media/so%20Stuff/poll1-1282.jpg.html)


AND the original as the same quality jpeg
http://i1127.photobucket.com/albums/l625/TimDigger/so%20Stuff/pollOriginal-1282.jpg (http://s1127.photobucket.com/user/TimDigger/media/so%20Stuff/pollOriginal-1282.jpg.html)


Pete please put up your edit, the more I look the more the differences disappear. And then we will run a poll.

Tel
17-02-2016, 06:58 PM
First is more atmospheric imho Pete

Have to agree, first looks underwater the second looks like it's in air.

Pete Bullen
17-02-2016, 07:04 PM
My edit of Tim's shot, took me about 6 seconds.
http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm243/petebalkan/Tims%20wreck-1282.jpg (http://s298.photobucket.com/user/petebalkan/media/Tims%20wreck-1282.jpg.html)

Pete Bullen
17-02-2016, 09:02 PM
Have to agree, first looks underwater the second looks like it's in air.

Read what Tim has posted. The 2nd shot is completely unedited except to reduce it in size for posting. At the point you and Totty commented my version wasn't even uploaded. :)

Tunicates
17-02-2016, 10:38 PM
Pete's edit wins this for me. I think he's dialled up the whites a lot more, pushed the exposure and contrast a tad and dialled in a bit more black and possibly pushed the highlights a bit. Possibly not a lot else.

The effect is to strongly bring out a nice diagonal on the right hand bottom of the passageway that leads the eye into the image to the diver, who otherwise is a bit lost. Nicely done.