Comments on: Photoshop fakers http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/ Just another WordPress weblog Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:54:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Domhnall Dods http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-17 Domhnall Dods Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:30:29 +0000 http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-17 Nomally I prefer to leave things as they were (apart from tidying up) but when our son was born we planned a family shoot with both sets of grandparents when he was a week old. My in laws had travelled from Ireland but my parents were ill and couldn't make it. They live locally so I decided to shoot the family group with a gap left for my parents. Then when they were well enough, I set up the same scene but with everyone else missing and just shot them. I merged the two together to make the shot we had originally planned. Cheating? Probably but it was easier than having everyone jump on more flights for the sake of one photo. Babies grow up so fast there was no other way to capture that moment when he was so tiny so I feel it was justified cheating. Nomally I prefer to leave things as they were (apart from tidying up) but when our son was born we planned a family shoot with both sets of grandparents when he was a week old.

My in laws had travelled from Ireland but my parents were ill and couldn’t make it. They live locally so I decided to shoot the family group with a gap left for my parents. Then when they were well enough, I set up the same scene but with everyone else missing and just shot them. I merged the two together to make the shot we had originally planned. Cheating? Probably but it was easier than having everyone jump on more flights for the sake of one photo. Babies grow up so fast there was no other way to capture that moment when he was so tiny so I feel it was justified cheating.

]]> By: Paola Jofre http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-14 Paola Jofre Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:36:44 +0000 http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-14 I agree with Rosie....to remove a person or memory does not seem right...but to remove a bird...trash can...wires is another thing...for me...i shoot and if i don't get it right i shoot again...the only time i play with an image is if i have a concept in mind for a story in my image .....candid family shots i leave them alone....it was the moment...and i would want to have those shots as is for my kids and family to remember ..... I agree with Rosie….to remove a person or memory does not seem right…but to remove a bird…trash can…wires is another thing…for me…i shoot and if i don’t get it right i shoot again…the only time i play with an image is if i have a concept in mind for a story in my image …..candid family shots i leave them alone….it was the moment…and i would want to have those shots as is for my kids and family to remember …..

]]> By: Rosie Tanner http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-13 Rosie Tanner Thu, 21 Aug 2008 14:18:36 +0000 http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-13 I think I'd always have an underlying guilt for messing with history - what's done is done (unless its a trash can!) I think I’d always have an underlying guilt for messing with history - what’s done is done (unless its a trash can!)

]]> By: Kirk Nelson http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-12 Kirk Nelson Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:11:23 +0000 http://blog.photoshopcreative.co.uk/general/photoshop-fakers/#comment-12 It's an interesting discussion to be sure. If we have a vacation shot of a perfect sunset, but there's an ugly trash can, or gaudy billboard, in the shot at just the wrong spot. We feel there's nothing wrong with cloning it out to create a better image, even though we know in reality there was a nasty rubbish container spoiling the view. Yet when the same philosophy is applied to a person, especially a person intimately involved in the memory. That seems to be a bit creepy. Why is that? It’s an interesting discussion to be sure. If we have a vacation shot of a perfect sunset, but there’s an ugly trash can, or gaudy billboard, in the shot at just the wrong spot. We feel there’s nothing wrong with cloning it out to create a better image, even though we know in reality there was a nasty rubbish container spoiling the view.

Yet when the same philosophy is applied to a person, especially a person intimately involved in the memory. That seems to be a bit creepy. Why is that?

]]>