Photoshopping Street Photos Yes/No?

[GSNfan]

I don't buy the often repeated excuse that b&w is an abstraction of reality, it is not. A b&w picture of a cat is a picture of cat, not a dog, a mouse or a koala, its the description of a cat photographed. The change is merely the appearance, which is of different colors, and since color itself is non existent without light, that makes color a purely superficial aspect of the image anyway.

 

[jsrockit]

Its ugly and distracting.

Sure, it can be... but not always. Many things are distracting in photos if you let them be... but when do the alterations stop? At some point, the photo turns into something else... it wasn't a diss and wasn't from a purist's point of view. I actually like the works I've seen of yours.

I'm an artist, not a journalist and I know enough about the history of photography to know that trying to be 'pure' is idiotic because no such thing exists. As has been pointed out by others, just using black and white film abstracts reality to a considerable degree. So does the common practice of using colored filters for BW work to alter tonal relationships. Using wideangle or tele lenses also departs from how the human eye sees a scene. My photographs are MY representation of my world. You want 'reality'? Go to these places yourself and look with your own eyes 😛

Hey, no problem... do what you want. I just simply said I never remove trash from my photos. Never even though about it. Now, it has me thinking.

 

[Keith]

Hey ... if you must remove trash from your photos at least try and be environmentally responsible and re-cycle.

Please! :angel:

 

[Sparrow]

sometimes, but I feel dirty afterwards ...

 

[Steve Bellayr]

In a Tom Ang book he shows an photo of a street scene. Then he removes the flat sky and adds a much enhanced sky from another part of the world. Still, he muses there is something missing: Not enough people. He adds people to the street scene. (This was just an exercise.) The reconstructed photo made up of different parts of the world is much better. The question remains: Is this a street scene or a collage? IMHO photoshop and photography (or computer generated images) are not the same thing. Keith provides a good example of another problem or honesty in photography. He took an average photography and by altering it with a computer he enhanced the image thereby making it a much better image. But for what purpose and what skills were demonstrated?

 

[barnwulf]

I think that removing or adding anything in a picture makes it a bit of a fake. If you don't like some of the things that are in the viewfinder, don't take the picture or move in closer or change your angle to eliminate that which is not wanted. Work the scene and shoot as many shots as you can. You will likely get at least one picture without trash or other undesirable things in the picture. Dodging and Burning are fine I think. I do it sometimes. Just my opinion about how I do my work. Jim

 

[Sparrow]

I think that removing or adding anything in a picture makes it a fake. If you don't like some of the things that are in the viewfinder, don't take the picture or move in closer or change your angle to eliminate that which is not wanted. Work the scene and shoot as many shots as you can. You will likely get at least one picture without trash or other undesirable things in the picture. Dodging and Burning are fine I think. I do it sometimes. Just my opinion. Jim

What if I didn't see it at time? surely then it would be different to my perceived reality, and therefore give lie to my version of reality whereas removing it would restore my truth, no?

 

[Vilk]

just trying to match my wet prints. scanners have loooong way to go 😎

 

[back alley]

is a writer allowed to edit his words?
or should it be perfect as first written?

same with composer?

etc?

 

[thegman]

I'd say do whatever you want to enjoy your hobby.

 

[Vilk]

I'd say do whatever you want to enjoy your hobby.

...unless your name is Ernst Stavro Bloefeld 🙄

 

[kbg32]

It's your vision. Use it when you need it.

 

[Sparrow]

Sparrow wrote:

Not seeing something that's unwanted in a picture happens and that's why I try to shoot from several different angles and move in closer for a shot or two. This gives me options and hopefully I have a shot to choose that if fine the way it is. You have do decide for yourself what you feel is right for the picture. It depends a lot of the purpose of the picture.

Ah, yes but isn't that just distorting reality but by another method, in fact worse, you're discarding whole frames full of reality whereas in photoshop it may just be one small area that needs correcting 😱

 

[Steven Veit]

I see the camera as a tool that's great for expressing an artistic vision or idea, and darkroom techniques, whether wet or digital, seem to me perfectly OK extensions of this tool. Sometimes I use them more or less, sometimes not. Sometimes it seems to work well, sometimes not so well. I think we're long past the point in the history of photography, though, where any image alterations should be considered as some sort of inappropriate violation of an objective reality. After all, one person's objective reality is just another's unimaginable dream. At least that's the way it looks in the photos I seem to like the most!

 

[igi]

You can only photograph scene that happened so cloning is very evil to me. 🙂

Cropping... you can always show them the whole photo if you want to. You'd just want them to focus at a certain scene.

Colors... you might be surprised that I can see more saturated colors than you! Or you might be color blind after all! 🙂

 

[jsrockit]

is a writer allowed to edit his words?
or should it be perfect as first written?

same with composer?

etc?

Yes, but those art forms start from scratch and are not derivative of something else.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Yes, but those art forms start from scratch and are not derivative of something else.

Sort of. But writing a novel derives from learning to read, then from watching people. Who is to say where you draw the line on after-treatment? Must a novelist's characters always correspond 1:1 with people they know? Should those people be approached to ask what they think they'd say? Who can guarantee that what they think they'd say is what they would say?

Cheers,

R.

 

[tbarker13]

You have to ask yourself what you are trying to do with your image. If it is your intent to document life as you saw it - then how could you possibly justify removing pieces from (or adding them to) the scene you have chosen to depict?
I believe it's dishonest - and I never do it with my documentary work (I include street photography in that). It is my intent to show what happened, not what I wish had happened. If there is trash on the street, then there is trash on the street.

However, if I were shooting something like glamour, art or a portrait, I'd be more inclined to make alterations to the image. (for example, I have no qualms about removing a skin blemish) But with those photos, I'm not documenting anything. I'm trying to create an image that evokes a certain emotion.

 

[Roger Hicks]

You have to ask yourself what you are trying to do with your image. If it is your intent to document life as you saw it - then how could you possibly justify removing pieces from (or adding them to) the scene you have chosen to depict?
I believe it's dishonest - and I never do it with my documentary work (I include street photography in that). It is my intent to show what happened, not what I wish had happened. If there is trash on the street, then there is trash on the street.

However, if I were shooting something like glamour, art or a portrait, I'd be more inclined to make alterations to the image. (for example, I have no qualms about removing a skin blemish) But with those photos, I'm not documenting anything. I'm trying to create an image that evokes a certain emotion.

Dear Tim,

So... With street photography you're not trying to evoke a certain emotion?

All I'm saying is that street photography does not HAVE to be warts-and-all documentary, and that there is no longer even an implied promise that it is, unless the photographer says it is.

Cheers,

R.

 

[johannielscom]

Dear Tim,

So... With street photography you're not trying to evoke a certain emotion?

All I'm saying is that street photography does not HAVE to be warts-and-all documentary, and that there is no longer even an implied promise that it is, unless the photographer says it is.

Cheers,

R.

+1 for that!

In the opinion of Garry Winogrand: "They're just pictures, they're not telling anything!"