Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Should digital corrected pictures be allowed in newspapers?


imcd22 13 3
7 Mar 2001 1:28AM
Most amateur photographers who have turned to digital enhancement and printing believe that the image editing software can do as much and more than the darkroom did. "Enhancement" is the key word here and by adjusting contrast, colour balance etc. my images are improved. Occasionally I have removed a lampost or a piece of litter from my pictures but always with a view to enhancing/improving the finished picture. I still use a traditional 35mm camera for the original image. Provided there is no intent to deceive what is the problem.?
Iain M

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

anon 11 31
27 Mar 2001 7:16AM
Pictures of introduces smiles, extra big boobs, skies full of aircraft, what can we believe?
Should travel agents be allowed to remove unwanted scaffolding? estate agents take out an overlooking house from the view of the garden? It's all easy can we trust photos. Should they have the words digitally enhanced.
Lets have a heated debate!
8 Aug 2001 1:28AM
You have never been able to trust a picture explicitly, however the image was produced. Some "experts" can do unbelievable things in the darkroom, especially with photographs. Just saying Digitally enhanced could mean any one of a mulitude of things, both good and bad.
Ken 13 4
8 Aug 2001 1:28AM
I agree, however the invention of the digital camera and the software with the ability to manipulate any element of any picture has made it all to easy to do. Darkroom manipulation techniques are an art, now anyone can do it for any means.
tom hardwick 13 11
8 Aug 2001 1:28AM
There's no holding back technology so the answer has to be yes, digitally tweaked pictures are the way it's gonna be.
Of course the darkroom has always been the place where the technician shows you what he wants you to see rather than
what the photographer saw as he pushed the button, so nothing's really changed.

tom.
Big Bri 13 15.7k United Kingdom
8 Aug 2001 1:28AM
My dad (a historian) is horrified by the thought that you can no longer believe what you see, but photographers have been doing this sort of thing for well over a hundred years.
I do think though that if you are selling a product, any "enhancement" of the photo could fall foul of the trade descriptions act.
I do think that true news pictures should not be ,changed, but can be ,enhanced, - sharpened for example.

Otherwise, why is digital a problem, other than it makes things easier. The famous war picture of the marines raising the flag on Mount Subarachi on Iwo Jima was set up by the photographer. Many great conventional photographs have been manipulated in the darkroom.

I see no change.
sven 13 1
8 Aug 2001 1:28AM
I am sure in this computer wise age it is only the fool who really believes that the camera never LIES.
2 Nov 2001 7:28PM
Never mind about introduced smiles etc.Since the papers went over to using digital photos the quality of pictures in the papers has plumetted.This applies equally to the so called quality newspapers as to the rags.
Tinman 12 29
28 Feb 2002 11:01PM
Why not, They have been not been telling the whole truth for many years with text.....now they can do the same with photos!!!
remember don't believe everything you hear some of what you see and a little of what you read.....

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.