Did you “Photoshop” that?

Longs Peak Silhouettes. Estes Park, Colorado, 2012

Of course I did! And if you are not post-processing your images you are neglecting a key part of the digital “developing” process. Unfortunately, most of your picture admirers don’t seem to understand that. For example, here is a typical conversation:”Wow, really cool shot! Did you Photoshop that?”

“Well, yes, I made some adjustments in Photoshop.”

“I guess it’s not really real then, huh?”

“Well, I think it reflects reality as I saw it…”

“Yeah, but…”

And so it goes.

The problem here is the question of what exactly constitutes a “manipulated” (i.e. “Photoshopped” in today’s jargon) image as opposed to the assumed-to-be-oh-so-pure images of the darkroom era gone by (oops…nearly gone by).

Here is the kicker, though: images have been manipulated since the very beginning of photography. For example, lets start at square one with subject choice–what do you include in the image? What do you leave out? Do you frame vertically? Horizontally? A square format? How about lens choice: telephoto, macro, or wide angle? The focal length will change the perspective of the scene drastically. Do you shoot from up high or down low? Do you get close or do you shoot from far away? Next, what f-stop do you choose? This will determine depth of field (and also affects exposure). And how about shutter speed? This may determine whether objects are blurred or sharp (yes, it also affects exposure). Then there is film speed or digital sensor sensitivity (ISO or, formerly, ASA). This will determine how grainy (or “noisy”, with digital) your image will be (once again, also affects exposure). Will you choose black and white (monochrome) film or will you go with color? (These digital days, this can be chosen after the fact.)

All of these alternatives throughout the image making process are creative decisions on the part of the photographer that will alter what a typical nude eyeball at the scene would have likely seen. So, strictly speaking, aren’t they all manipulations?

Now, on to the development and printing process. In the traditional chemical darkroom, a negative could be developed for longer or shorter periods of time. Negatives could be combined, spliced, cut, overlaid. When printing, a photographer could “burn” (add more light to darken) or “dodge” (hold back light to lighten) different areas of an image or vary the exposure time over the entire image. Aren’t these also manipulations?

I think the question might better be asked: What are acceptable manipulations? Here is my personal answer:

–Any manipulation which helps a photographer realize his or her artistic vision is acceptable.

–Manipulations designed to willfully mislead or cheat are not acceptable. (Especially true in the fields of photojournalism and forensic photography.)

The way I see it, the image captured by a digital camera today is merely a sort of initial negative that needs to be “developed” in post-processing in order to then be properly printed to the web or on paper. (Since I shoot in RAW, my images are truly initial negatives and will not look at all correct until post-processing is applied. If you shoot JPEG, the camera will be doing this post-processing for you inside the camera based on your camera menu settings, although some “post” adjustment is still possible.)

How does that answer sit with you? Now, if you’ll excuse me, while you ponder this I’ll get back to Photoshopping my images!

NOTE: There are a number of very good post-processing programs for digital images aside from Adobe Photoshop> For example: Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Photoshop Elements, iPhoto, Corel PaintShop, Gimp, Aperture, et al.