From: David Young <dnr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [LRFlex] A question of ethics...
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:40:15 -0800
All:
I recently posted my shot of a Male Grosbeak, asking for comments and
criticism. Mark Bohrer, of the LEG (the only other list I post to)
commented, saying: "And watch out for those pesky background branches. ;)"
He has a valid point... So I experimented and removed the "pesky background
branches" using photoshop's clone and heal tools. I think the shot looks a
lot better.
To compare the two, go to http://www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr and then click on
'featured photo'.
To compare the modified shot, simply click on the photo itself. The
modified photo is clearly marked. Even on dial up, once the second photo
has loaded, you can almost instantly compare the two by clicking on the
photos... the shots will toggle back and forth quite nicely.
My question to you is: Is this ethical?
In my recently posted "eagle in the snow" shot I'd removed some extraneous
branch tips shooting in from the right. However, these did not actually
touch the subject, and removing these extraneous elements was, to me, no
different than if I dodged them out during the printing of a silver print.
Here, the changes are much more fundamental to the character of the
original photo.
In the minds of those here, is this ethical? Would you alter a photo this
much and still call it yours? Where is the boundary?
Thanks for your thoughts.... personally, I don't know just what to think!
Best,
David.
----------
David Young, | égalité, liberté,
Victoria, CANADA | fraternité et Beaujolais.
Personal Web-site at:
http://www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr
Leica Reflex Forum web-page:
http://www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
