Journals | |
| April 5, 1999 | |
| Ethics and Adobe Photoshop: Recently
on the NPPA (National Press Photographer's Association) e-mail discussion
list, photojournalist have pondered the ethics of using Photoshop to "enhance"
images. First let me say that the types of images included in this discussion
were of the "news" category. This did not include photo illustrations
or feature photos such as those taken in someone's office to illustrate
a feature story about that person. For the most part, these discussions have been focused on using Photoshop to manipulate photographs with tools such as the Gaussian Blur filter. Some photographers say that "traditional" darkroom techniques are acceptable. These traditional methods typically include "dodging" an area out or "burning" areas in. By dodging an area of a photograph, the content of that area is made lighter than the rest of the photo to make it less noticeable. As where "burning" darkens the area for the same purpose of making it less noticeable. Others have said it is acceptable to do what can be done in Photoshop to enhance the image without changing the content. In other words, applying filters to blur out distracting backgrounds. However, most photojournalist agree that removing anything from the photograph is a NO-NO, and even more so would agree that adding an element to a news photo would be totally unacceptable. As far as my stand, I am not sure just yet. I have heard many arguments for either sides of this discussion many times and still have not set a concrete rule for myself, other than taking elements out of a photo or placing elements in a photo. Those two manipulations used for news photos are complete NO-No's in my opinion. Many argue that what the camera captures on the scene is the way the photo should be displayed. If this were the case, many photos readers see in the newspaper would not be viewable. The colors would not match reality. Photoshop is our tool and I think that we should and are using it in a manner to make our images better for the readers. The images below are "tinkered" versions of the same original I took Saturday morning for an Easter feature. | |
 |
|
| The photo on the left is the original photo as I took it at the scene. The photo on the right is how it ran in the newspaper on Sunday April 4, 1999. These photos are different only in that the one that ran has been changed to black and white. The photo ran on an inside page without color. | |
 |
 |
| The photo on the left has been altered in Photoshop with the dodging technique. As you can see the background has been lightened so that the reader is not distracted by the elements in the background. However, the brightness makes the background stand out so much it is more distracting that the original background. The photo on the right has been altered by the burning technique. The background is much darker making the subjects stand out more, yet this too is distracting. For those arguing that dodging and burning are acceptable because it is not altering the scene, this simply isn't true. The dodging makes it look as if the subjects were under some sort of covering (making it darker where they were than it was outside) when actually they were standing out in the middle of a parking lot. The burned in photo looks as if it were 8:00pm. Again, not true. This photo was taken around 9:30am CST. | |
 |
|
| The photo on the left has been altered in Photoshop with the Gaussian Blur filter. The background area between the subjects was selected and blurred so that it would appear out of focus, therefore making it less distracting. The photo on the right is the original photo as taken on the scene. The Gaussian Blur used on the left image shows a more realistic version of what I saw when looking at the scene without the camera. My reasoning, because I have two eyes, like most other people on this planet. When I look at something, my eyes focus on that subject. Anything beyond that point is going to be somewhat of a blurred image. Our eyes are spaced approximately 2-3 inches apart. When we look at a subject, the line of sight from each eye will actually meet at that focusing point and cross thereafter, thus causing a blurred (actually doubled) vision. If you don't believe this, take your finger, hold it in front of you nose and move it out to the closest point your eyes can focus. Without moving your eyes from your finger, notice the background. It will appear as if you are crossing your eyes (because you actually are). | |
| Tell me what you think | |
| © 1999 Timothy C. Baker | |
| About Me / Portfolio / Photo Of The Month / Flood '98 | |