If you are a photojournalist, you are concerned with conveying the message that what you photograph is a real event and happening in the moment. Adding crowds at a rally to make it seem more populist or changing the relative position of items in an image would be unacceptable, but minor color corrections would probably not be a problem (unless the color cast is an integral part of the scene). Wedding or product photographers, on the other hand, have a lot more freedom to move and edit items as necessary, as long as it supports their clients needs.
Things start getting a little trickier when photographing landscapes or working with street photography. It isn't photojournalism, per se, so would some editing be acceptable or is any editing too much editing? To answer this question, we need to think about how editing will affect the final presentation of the image. What exactly are we trying to communicate with our photograph? Are we there to accentuate the scene or record it faithfully? The colors of a sunset on a snowcapped mountainside may not need color enhancement as the whole point is to see the amazing view that the photographer recorded. But what if there was a heavy shadow with a cold blue color cast that detracted from the scene? If a viewer's eye keeps going to the shadow and not the mountain, should it be color corrected? What if a tree was distracting? If removing it completely would strengthen the composition, is that be acceptable? Although many may disagree, if I am at a location to communicate what I experienced, and that experience doesn't include a cold blue cast or a distracting tree, then I can guarantee I'll be busy color correcting and removing distractions from my images! I am there to experience, and I want the viewer to experience the same. My objective isn't faithfulness to reality, but faithfulness to the feelings and emotions I had when viewing the scene. In the end, a two-dimensional image is never real, even if you are a photojournalist. The very act of positioning your camera at a certain angle or at a specific place and time will change the meaning of the image, however unintentional. But it is understood that photojournalists are taking images of events that shape history, be they war or political rally, and by their very nature should be photographed as neutrally as possible on their part. A wedding, the landscape, a street view, however important, do not have that constraint. If editing is necessary to convey the experience, the image will be edited. How much editing is acceptable is really up to the photographer, since it is their image in the first place, and the viewer, because their opinion on the matter may decide if they find the image acceptable. I am not a photojournalist so I have no problems editing an image, as long as I am creating the qualities and emotions I'm trying to convey in that image. Painters add or subtract whatever they need, modify their color palette for effect or completely ignored reality in their attempts to imagine the abstract through their art. There is no reason to think photography can't do the same and it is high time photographers realize the freedom they have to do so. Even so, I do not heavily edit my images by adding a more interesting sky or shifting colors dramatically. It just isn't in me to do so. But that doesn't mean it isn't in you.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
fotostufphotographic illuminations Archives
December 2018
Categories
All
|