photoshop creative
Aug
20

Photoshop fakers

Posted in:
General, by Mark White
August 20, 2008

A recent article in the New York Times highlighted the fact that many people are using their Photoshop skills to help erase bad memories from their past. It reports that many people choose to clone out ex-lovers and ex-friends from their photos so they can enjoy the view without being haunted by the bad memories certain individuals bring up.It’s also being widely used to almost fake happy memories too, with people comping images together to forge a lasting memory of happy times spent together. In one way it makes me …

A recent article in the New York Times highlighted the fact that many people are using their Photoshop skills to help erase bad memories from their past. It reports that many people choose to clone out ex-lovers and ex-friends from their photos so they can enjoy the view without being haunted by the bad memories certain individuals bring up.It’s also being widely used to almost fake happy memories too, with people comping images together to forge a lasting memory of happy times spent together. In one way it makes me think ‘why not?’ Photoshop is a fantastic tool and if it makes you feel happy to erase parts of your past then go for it. On the other hand, however, there’s something that is slightly unnerving about changing the course of events, which doesn’t sit well with me.Why fake the past when you know inside who was present at the time? Sure, Photoshop can take people away or add them in in an instant, but deep inside the memory will always live on.Check out the article for yourself¬†http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/fashion/17photo.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin¬†

  • Kirk Nelson

    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?

  • Rosie Tanner

    I think I’d always have an underlying guilt for messing with history – what’s done is done (unless its a trash can!)

  • 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 …..

  • 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.