So... my final report is going to be on the ethics of photoshop. More specifically, it is an analysis of the different kinds of doctoring and the ethics of them. I would like input from a many people as possible, other photographers might get a quote or two in the paper (with their permission, and more than likely in a phone or email interview) and everyones input will help give me ideas. Examples: Photoshop was recently a big issue by Jennifer Lawrence (? was that her) when a cover photo of her was heavily doctored to remove weight from her face and enlarge her lips. Photoshop, however, is frequently used by studio photographers to remove blemishes (which affect the subject) and change lighting (affecting mood and photo quality). There is a difference between those two modifications. Photoshop is nearly universally used by cave photographers (unless you shot slide film) and I myself frequently burn shadows to remove noise and increase contrast in the image without modifying the actual scenery. On the far other end of the spectrum: HDR and compositing are exclusively photoshop products which dramatically change the image. Sometimes this is OK (specifically if the image is noted as doctored). My thoughts are jumping around, and not well organized, but I would like to start soon. Thoughts? Examples??? Tag your friends or invite them to the discussion! THANKS!
Posted on: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:18:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015