Using Photoshop to Lose Weight and Look Great!Posted by drfl on November 3rd, 2009
Back on June 6th I wrote an article entitled Photoshop Ethics in Digital Nature Photography that posed the question, “Where do we draw the line in regard to photoshop usage in nature photography”. It seems that this is a question that is plaguing other industries as well and is even prompting governments to get involved. This is not a new issue, in fact, since the invention of the camera, there has been evidence of manipulation. A recent set of articles have been written that focus on the extreme photoshopping that has been taking place in the fashion industry, one at the New York Times and one at the New York Daily Post.
These pieces deal specifically with Ralph Lauren advertisements that have been popping up in Australia and Japan. Frankly, I think that the women in the ads look a little freaky, and as a father of soon to be two daughters, I can’t say that I blame people for being upset with the image. It’s definitely a departure from the recent Dove ads that have been celebrating the “normal” woman. This leads to back to the question, where do we draw the line? Is red eye removal too much and we need to start putting labels on that, or do we have the ability to adjust contrast and maybe go with a little skin softening? If I decide to darken my sky with a physical neutral density filter, do I have to advertise that or just if I use the Nik neutral density filter?
As I mentioned in my Photoshop ethics post from June, there are landscape photographers that are not advertising their techniques and in fact are telling people they do very little manipulation. Perhaps to them, it doesn’t seem that much. If they were to show their process to someone who is new to Photoshop, though I think that individual would have a much different opinion. It seems many have adopted a “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. One the one hand it is art, but on the other many view it as dishonesty. With regard to advertising I do believe there is a level of honesty that must exist, otherwise we wouldn’t have false advertising suits that keep the attorneys busy. With art, however, I do believe that Photoshop can be a powerful tool, but an image should not be misrepresented. Celebrate the process, do not hide and condemn it. Too often we see people who claim, “just levels and contrast” when in fact they have added a little blur to the sky, changed the tone of the landscape, and the density of the mountain in the background. I guess that is “just levels and contrast” to an extreme. Still, don’t be ashamed, if the final product produced matched your vision, then the piece was a success regardless of the process. If an artist is fully truthful with themselves they will always make their vision their own.
In the vein of full disclosure, I will admit that for my “Harvest Moon” image above, I processed with ACR into Photoshop, used Viveza to adjust the contrast selectively, used the Nik Tonal Contrast Filter to add more contrast to the moon, and then I duplicated the layer and used a bit of Orton for the clouds, masking out the moon. This is my final product and what I envisaged when I captured the image.
Technical Details:
Canon 50d, 300 f/4l + 1.4tc, f/8, 1/160 sec.
DeSoto National Wildlife Refuge, Iowa Side
This photograph can be viewed on my website at: Harvest Moon - Late Autumn Moon Over DeSoto National Wildlife Refuge