> So what do you think - not specifically about these images but as a > general view. Even the great photographers of the past > weren't shy when > it came to 'improving' images - a dodge and burn here; a > replacement sky > there.... I sometimes wonder what some of the great photographers of > the past would have thought about Photoshop, had they been > alive to use > it. In many > cases, I'm sure they would have regarded it as another useful tool to > help in > their craft. >
It depends on what the photographer is claiming about the image. If you photoshop some fairies into your picture, claim that they really were there at the bottom of your garden, and sell the photos to the News of the World on that basis, then you're very obviously lying and it would be no different to writing an article about the aforementioned fairies and claiming that it was true. If on the other hand you sell the same picture as a whimsical fantasy image then you're not doing anything wrong*. Most people know the difference between fiction and reporting. It's not wrong or immoral to write fiction*. The immoral thing is to claim fiction as reporting. It's not wrong or immoral to photoshop a photograph - the immoral thing is to lie about it**. Bob *although personally I would imprison all writers of fantasy & science fiction, and if he were still alive I would have Tolkien cut into small pieces and fed to dwarves. **generally speaking. There are, of course, situations where lying is a moral thing to do, but going into detail here is stretching things a bit. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
