Photographer
Andrew77uk
Posts: 320
Salisbury, England, United Kingdom
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
When the models partner/parents whoever does'nt recognise him/her from the final images.
Or when the model walks into the studio and you don't recognise her from his/her pic's.
Photographer
STANJOHNSON
Posts: 461
Detroit, Michigan, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. that's the business of the beast.........
Retoucher
Michael Brittain
Posts: 2214
Wahiawa, Hawaii, US
Photoshop or not... Not every woman can be 5'10" 105 lbs and match the skin of a 15 year old. This has been an issue long before photoshop... retouchers are only one part of the process.
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 17824
El Segundo, California, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. When corsets, makeup, high heels, colored contact lenses, false eyelashes, and wigs are prohibited?
When the starting point for images isn't based on a model who is representative of less than .001% of the population even before makeup, styling, or anything else?
Photographer
Photography by John
Posts: 502
Prescott, Arizona, US
I don't know if editing can go too far - it can however, go wrong....
Model
Courtney Starrburst
Posts: 100
Cherry Hill, New Jersey, US
Photoshop doesn't go to far. People do.
LOL. It's just art. The standards will change. It's a part of life.
Photographer
Blakberi Photography
Posts: 1647
Quebec, Quebec, Canada
Kevin Connery wrote:
When corsets, makeup, high heels, colored contact lenses, false eyelashes, and wigs are prohibited?
When the starting point for images isn't based on a model who is representative of less than .001% of the population even before makeup, styling, or anything else? word
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. When it causes problems for the subject because they are not as they appear.
Photographer
SunArcher Photography
Posts: 7669
Washington, District of Columbia, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. When the client says to. Period. The aspirations of "lots of naive women" are generally of no concern to a client (including if that client is the model/subject). They want what they want. We either give it to them, they go somewhere else to get it, or they decide not to want it anymore.
Kevin Connery wrote:
When corsets, makeup, high heels, colored contact lenses, false eyelashes, and wigs are prohibited? Co-sign.
Kevin Connery wrote:
When the starting point for images isn't based on a model who is representative of less than .001% of the population even before makeup, styling, or anything else? Word.
Photographer
Robert Randall
Posts: 13890
Chicago, Illinois, US
I don't think you can ever go too far, the mere mention of that as an endpoint is a limitation. If in the end, you have pushed a picture to the point of containing one dark pixel in a canvas of white pixels, revel in the fact that you have one more pixel to play with.
Photographer
Jeff Fiore
Posts: 9225
Brooklyn, New York, US
As some glamour photographers told me - "I give them what they want". If models wants over-Photoshoped photos that doesn't even look like them, that is the responsibility of models - not the photographers.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
Robert Randall wrote:
I don't think you can ever go too far, the mere mention of that as an endpoint is a limitation. If in the end, you have pushed a picture to the point of containing one dark pixel in a canvas of white pixels, revel in the fact that you have one more pixel to play with. That's to the point when a client has no idea what the difference is between good work and bad work but pays.
We have all probably seen mags with poor retouching work.
As the post above in regards to glamour models ' give them what they want'.
Retoucher
Midas Post-production
Posts: 1258
London, England, United Kingdom
Insecurities aren't caused by photoshop, the insecurities were there in the first place. It's women who need to see that it's not real, it's just art.
How do you think people felt when the statue of venus was unveiled?
People are insecure in themselves, so why should i care enough to limit how much i photoshop an image?
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
With reference to models , is it what models want to see (insecurity) 'give them what they want' or the retouchers interpretation of what he/she would like to see on the final art work ?
Is there a compromise, middle ground ?
Photographer
Duane Allen Rusty Halo
Posts: 1000
Colorado Springs, Colorado, US
Photography by John wrote:
I don't know if editing can go too far - it can however, go wrong.... true eveeeer sooo true
Photographer
AUTONOMY
Posts: 3674
Robert Randall wrote:
I don't think you can ever go too far, the mere mention of that as an endpoint is a limitation. If in the end, you have pushed a picture to the point of containing one dark pixel in a canvas of white pixels, revel in the fact that you have one more pixel to play with. I think I'm going to cry.
Photographer
Dreamscape Creative
Posts: 479
Charleston, South Carolina, US
There isn't anything unethical about retouching someone to the point where they look like a bag of bones. If people really think they need to look like that, I think there's something they need to address in their lives, and it's not their physical appearance.
But I personally won't manipulate an image that far. I do want to help cultivate a culture where a healthier body is something to have, but not to the degree where the poor people look like they're not getting enough to eat. It's pretty absurd that ever got to be popular in the first place.
Photographer
Kevin Greggain Photography
Posts: 6769
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
Robert Randall wrote:
I don't think you can ever go too far, the mere mention of that as an endpoint is a limitation. If in the end, you have pushed a picture to the point of containing one dark pixel in a canvas of white pixels, revel in the fact that you have one more pixel to play with. ha!! +1 on that
Retoucher
BodyDoc Retoucher
Posts: 54
Harrisburg, Arkansas, US
Given the pure intravenous media saturation we are under, we are becoming desensitized to reality as a whole.
Why do movies have special effects which are obviously not real ? We don't want to see real. It's boring.
Take a beautiful model. Perfect in (almost) every way but she hates.. her nose.. You adjust her nose, and suddenly she's happy, and everyone looking at the image is happy.
Photoshop is a digital plastic surgery but it's way more in-depth than that.
I came from a drawing and painting background and the digital playground in making a photo my own after the fact is pure excitement because I am the only limitation to that work.
Some say that doesn't make me a photographer anymore.. Fine with me.. I hate labels anyway.
Retoucher
Midas Post-production
Posts: 1258
London, England, United Kingdom
If she was perfect in everyway you wouldn't have to fix her nose? But you are right, reality is a bore. BodyDoc Retoucher wrote:
Given the pure intravenous media saturation we are under, we are becoming desensitized to reality as a whole.
Why do movies have special effects which are obviously not real ? We don't want to see real. It's boring.
Take a beautiful model. Perfect in (almost) every way but she hates.. her nose.. You adjust her nose, and suddenly she's happy, and everyone looking at the image is happy.
Photoshop is a digital plastic surgery but it's way more in-depth than that.
I came from a drawing and painting background and the digital playground in making a photo my own after the fact is pure excitement because I am the only limitation to that work.
Some say that doesn't make me a photographer anymore.. Fine with me.. I hate labels anyway.
Photographer
Dreamscape Creative
Posts: 479
Charleston, South Carolina, US
BodyDoc Retoucher wrote:
Given the pure intravenous media saturation we are under, we are becoming desensitized to reality as a whole.
Why do movies have special effects which are obviously not real ? We don't want to see real. It's boring.
Take a beautiful model. Perfect in (almost) every way but she hates.. her nose.. You adjust her nose, and suddenly she's happy, and everyone looking at the image is happy.
Photoshop is a digital plastic surgery but it's way more in-depth than that.
I came from a drawing and painting background and the digital playground in making a photo my own after the fact is pure excitement because I am the only limitation to that work.
Some say that doesn't make me a photographer anymore.. Fine with me.. I hate labels anyway. I believe the vast majority of the famous photographers manipulated their photos, as well. They may not have done it digitally, but they did it, all the same.
Photographer
BTHPhoto
Posts: 6985
Fairbanks, Alaska, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Same as when we should stop manipulating a print in the darkroom - when it's done.
Photographer
JLC Images
Posts: 11615
Phillipsburg, New Jersey, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. I try not to limit myself because of the "naive". I will cease editing when I decide not based on the unrealistic goals of naive women. Everyone has choices in life and if theirs it based solely on the physical I blame their upbringing rather than pictures.
Photographer
Hassy501
Posts: 1351
If the creator of the piece is happy with it, and it's HIS work, who's to say when to stop.....isn't that what creating art is all about ? I guess he could stop if his pc or mac crashes ??
Photographer
BTHPhoto
Posts: 6985
Fairbanks, Alaska, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
... ethically ... Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. Also, it really pisses me off when people suggest that the basis for my ethics should be to make up for other peoples' irresponsible choices.
Photographer
WIP
Posts: 15973
Cheltenham, England, United Kingdom
I tend to as others get absorbed in this retouching forum hysteria. Reading the forums where the guru's are giving advice and then have a little play with what some have suggested.
And then.....dump it all as I pick up a book of images by R. Avedon.
How much or who retouched his images made them work as there's no obvious retouch. To me that is retouching.
Photographer
Renaud Lucas
Posts: 157
Miami, Florida, US
when they start charging $1000 for the software!!! 
Model
Dove KT
Posts: 592
Tacoma, Washington, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. When the client says, "hey, what the hell is that?" For trade work with a model, that can be when her skin looks plastic or her measurements changed from 32-27-35 to 40-23-35 (or, that could be what she wants). For many fashion magazines, that won't be until the model is, in their eyes, "perfect."
*shrugs*
Demands of the industry.
Model
Jennifer Barker
Posts: 8010
Houston, Arkansas, US
Kevin Connery wrote:
When corsets, makeup, high heels, colored contact lenses, false eyelashes, and wigs are prohibited?
When the starting point for images isn't based on a model who is representative of less than .001% of the population even before makeup, styling, or anything else? We Have A Winner ... 
Retoucher
Glamour Retouch
Posts: 900
Columbia, South Carolina, US
Kevin Connery wrote:
When corsets, makeup, high heels, colored contact lenses, false eyelashes, and wigs are prohibited?
When the starting point for images isn't based on a model who is representative of less than .001% of the population even before makeup, styling, or anything else? I agree
Photographer
Tonic Dog Studios
Posts: 12527
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? When the next photographer has to over-PS the model to get him/her to look like the model's port. (ie, false advertising).
Some models need a disclaimer: "I need heavy PS to fully function as advertised." (as do some photogs...)
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 27130
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Tonic Dog Studios wrote:
When the next photographer has to over-PS the model to get him/her to look like the model's port. (ie, false advertising).
Some models need a disclaimer: "I need heavy PS to fully function as advertised." (as do some photogs...) Nah.. that just means the model should have an unretouched head shot/body shot on her profile.
Bad on the next photographer for not checking references/asking pertinent questions.
Photographer
GavinJPhoto
Posts: 95
Spokane, Washington, US
The best art comes from the heart
Photographer
Mark Salo
Posts: 11733
Olney, Maryland, US
Robert Randall wrote:
I don't think you can ever go too far, the mere mention of that as an endpoint is a limitation. If in the end, you have pushed a picture to the point of containing one dark pixel in a canvas of white pixels, revel in the fact that you have one more pixel to play with. AUTONOMY wrote:
I think I'm going to cry. Tears of emotion!
Photographer
K E E L I N G
Posts: 39894
Peoria, Illinois, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Especially in a culture where a lot of naive woman aspire to a look that cant be matched. Ethically? I'd say when someone either dies or gets seriously injured from it.
Because unless Photoshop actually puts someone in the hospital it's just a creative choice.
Photographer
greg desiatov
Posts: 368
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Photography by John wrote:
I don't know if editing can go too far - it can however, go wrong.... Spot on!
Photographer
MisterC
Posts: 15162
Portland, Oregon, US
Andrew Chorley wrote:
When do you think ethically we should stop at photoshop'ing an image? Didn't know PS had ethics. Thought it was art.
"Uh, Mr Picasso, her eyes don't look like that in real life..."
Retoucher
CS Toledo
Posts: 419
Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines
BodyDoc Retoucher wrote:
Given the pure intravenous media saturation we are under, we are becoming desensitized to reality as a whole.
Why do movies have special effects which are obviously not real ? We don't want to see real. It's boring.
Take a beautiful model. Perfect in (almost) every way but she hates.. her nose.. You adjust her nose, and suddenly she's happy, and everyone looking at the image is happy.
Photoshop is a digital plastic surgery but it's way more in-depth than that.
I came from a drawing and painting background and the digital playground in making a photo my own after the fact is pure excitement because I am the only limitation to that work.
Some say that doesn't make me a photographer anymore.. Fine with me.. I hate labels anyway. My thoughts exactly - labels! My dilemma, when I was signing up here in MM, was whether to join as "Photographer" or "Photoshop Wizard". I chose the latter since I know I can't help photochopping heavily(I came from a drawing background too). However, I'm constantly striving hard to leave as little mark/trace as possible that the photo has been retouched.
Anyway, to answer the question, I think photochopping has gone overboard when it was done sloppily. No matter how much it was retouched, as long as it looks right (also ask for others' opinion. LOL.) and you (plus others) love it then go for it. Beauty is subjective anyway. And yes, you don't tell Picasso his painting doesn't look the same as the subject.
Photoshop gives us great power to convert our ideas into terms, not hinder and limit it. You can play with it, experiment with it, or even mess with it. But just burn the evidence that you did and unveil your master piece. It has just to be used the right way because with great power comes great responsibility (I know!!! LOL).
P.S. just my two cents (hurray! I finally used this phrase!)
Photographer
Leroy Dickson
Posts: 8239
Flint, Michigan, US
When the person picking up the tab says it's too far.
|
