Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 24, 2003, 1:18 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Soundengineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 313
Default

That was an excellent link.....hehe...he had done some good work there.

The issue about digital manipulation of photographs have been in my thoughts lately. I have been taking photographs of my grandmother and my mother, and both do not enjoy it at all. They are both aging and feel very self-conscious about their looks and wrinkles. They prefer that I do not take photoes of them. But I think that photoes are important....,especially for my son to look at when they are not here.

My way arround this problem has been to remove the extremety of their wrinkles and blemishes on the photoes and to show it to them afterwards. This way, I have gained their trust and am allowed to take more photoes of them and it makes them feel okay about themselves to see those photoes.

Ethical considerations are as such: In personal family and friends photoes I have come to terms with digital manipulation. These people do not want to be remembered for their blue bruised legs, or deeply wrinkled faces, and I do not see why they need to be remembered for them. The important things with these relations is the feelings and experiences we had with them....and seing their smile and eyes, are probably all that are important for us in order to remember those moments. And if you have to manipulate the pictures a little in order to get their trust in order to take more photoes, then I think that is okay. As long as no-one is hurt by it, in the long run or in the short run.

I do not know the story behind the lady in the bikini, whether she was in on the digital manipulation or not. So I cannot coment on it. It appears that repeated magazine model manipulation does hurt people, if not the most, young teenage girls who strive to be like them, so I cannot say that I think that is okay.

In any case, I am at the moment learning how to manipulate images for personal affairs, so I found that link very interesting.
Soundengineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2003, 1:22 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 331
Default

I think the reason we all look worse in pictures than we think we look in a mirror is because people tend to look a little more closely on pictures than their own reflection. Also, photos seem to emphasize shades more than our eyes do, so any shadows or blemishes of a darker shade will stick out more.
ardvark50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2003, 2:29 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

As actors get older, it is becoming common place to post produce faces to enhance good looks. Make up has been doing that for years. Some new pro TV cams are able to recognise skin tones and de-focus only those areas!

Soundengineer has got the practical solution. As a photographer you are an artist and need to be creative, with a licence to deliver what pleases your customers!

When you meet somebody face to face you are attentive to other things, but when you look at a photograph there is no voice, animation or scene setting to distract your attention from the detail. In fact with portraits we often deliberately modify backgrounds to increase subject focus.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2003, 4:53 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 394
Default One Tip

One technique often used by artists is to put one of the eyes near or at the center of a photo. If you look at a lot of portraits you will see when the center of interest is an eye many of the other features....like wrinkles....are not as noticable. I crop many of my photos with this in mind. Profiles typically show off the detail and can get you in lots of trouble. But they can also be good "character" photos that the subject will object to. Keep those to yourself. Up until the time of VanGogh portraits were often done for the rich and were what the subject "wanted to see". VanGogh painted ordinary people. Some of these paintings contain flaws but we still like them for their content.
normc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2003, 8:50 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
jazcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 371
Default

Very interesting topic! That link was shocking. It is too bad that beauty and fashion magazines find it so necessary to manipulate images so that everything looks perfect. Unfortunately, young girls grow up wondering why they don't look like that and that can cause a lot of self-esteem problems.
jazcan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2003, 5:49 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25
Default

Hi,
Our mind always plays tricks with us. We all like to look better. We amuse ourselves all the time.
I want to say something... general... about humans.. and nothing to do in particular about any body in this discussion.
This sense of physical beauty is a relative thing... there is not end to this craving. The true beauty is the beauty of heart. It would do this world a great benifit if we all had beautiful hearts. We should strive for it. I doubt.... I guess I dont do that myself...
I am sorry if this sounds absurd or irrelevent.. but that was what came to my mind....
Sincerely,
a passer by
bhaskarannadata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2003, 6:11 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,910
Default

But the camera has no heart, and doesn't censor details. It reflects the world exactly as it sees it. That's where a talented artist with a mouse (or stylus and tablet) comes in.

I know in my case one of the things I did when I was first learning to retouch skin blemishes was to remove the famous mole from Cindy Crawford's upper lip for practice.

It's great though that someone as popular as her leaves it alone and unretouched.
Mike_PEAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2003, 10:31 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25
Default LoL

Peat is absolutely right. There is no diputing the facts! Camera, Sensor, Art, Mouse and all of it...
bhaskarannadata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2003, 11:24 AM   #19
kex
Senior Member
 
kex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,022
Default

this topic has turned to a very interesting discussion.
But I'd like to know something:
I took a photo of myself and fixed some things. It's now my avatar. What do you think about it? I think it might bee too much and it looks a little bit artificial. If you agree to me, I'll use the original one if you can handle reality
kex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2003, 1:49 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

It looks a bit like an Avatar - you know, the graphics characters in Toy Story! But it illustrates a point. If your intention is to show a small image, then adding facial detail and colour variation actually makes it more life-like and human, particularly when you are displaying on a lower res. monitor screen. The first impression of a portrait must be it looks human and real, the second impression discussed here is the image must be pleasing - but to whom? I know my passport office wants unedited sharp pics (although I do know some who tinker with PS and do their own!)

I'll pay him a compliment and say that BillDrew's Avatar (I don't know if it is him or not!) conveys a picture of a human being and even its small size could convey something about the person behind it. The ladies here do o.k on the reality look as well.

It's the same problem with sharpening decisions, big prints may need less and can look more natural, small prints need the impact to attract and keep attention. VOX. (interesting topic)
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:24 PM.