What is considered "cheating" in photography?

[wildcat]

... making woman boobs bigger(Liquify) is a very common technique.

...

look at those gal photos posted by the photo outing organizer. very nice right? the skin very smooth and no flaw right? but if you meet the gal in real life, you will be disappointed...

Oh dear. Now I am disappointed

 

[cabbySHE]

totally wrong.

removing of pimples , scar, making the muscle bigger or making woman boobs bigger(Liquify) is a very common technique.

if you think editing is cheating, it's time to quit photography.


look at those gal photos posted by the photo outing organizer. very nice right? the skin very smooth and no flaw right? but if you meet the gal in real life, you will be disappointed. Objects on you screen might not appear as good as they are. but then again, if the event organizer post gal photo with flaw[ with pimples( got juice ooze from it), messy hair, scar, ugly tattoo] no one will pay for the photo shoot outing. This is a fact.

Think you might be speaking from experience.

those " juice " are actually pus.

G_t_ by ad is an outright cheat.

 

[AngKuGuay]

totally wrong.

removing of pimples , scar, making the muscle bigger or making woman boobs bigger(Liquify) is a very common technique.

if you think editing is cheating, it's time to quit photography.

Woah. I guess it all depends on the situation right? For commercial purposes, I think its somehow understandable. But to say that one should quit photography because they do not believe in cheating by "removing of pimples , scar, making the muscle bigger or making woman boobs bigger", thats a bit of an extremist view.

 

[iliketea]

Woah. I guess it all depends on the situation right? For commercial purposes, I think its somehow understandable. But to say that one should quit photography because they do not believe in cheating by "removing of pimples , scar, making the muscle bigger or making woman boobs bigger", thats a bit of an extremist view.

Or maybe should say "if u think editing is cheating, it's time u backtrack to film cameras" ;p
I realised, those people who think editing is cheating are normally those who don't know how, lazy to learn or has no talent for digital editing. When comparing to enhanced photos, they often self console and feel proud that their photos are raw while others cheat.

Seriously, I don't think there is anything call "cheating in photography"... Basically there's nothing for you to cheat! lol.. We only say someone cheat when he edited a photo and deny about it!!!

Anyway it's the digital age... Editing is digital darkroom.. It's part of digital photography!!

 

[Octarine]

Anyway it's the digital age... Editing is digital darkroom.. It's part of digital photography!!

:thumbsup: In the same way as editing in darkroom was part of the film era. From Wikipedia (about Dodging):

An excellent example is the photograph "Schweitzer at the Lamp" by W. Eugene Smith, from his 1954 photo essay A Man of Mercy on Dr. Albert Schweitzer and his humanitarian work in French Equatorial Africa. The image took 5 days to produce, in order to reproduce the tonal range of the scene, which ranges from a bright lamp (relative to the scene) to dark shadow.

Hope that we can bury the dead horse of "Post-processing is cheating" soonest.

 

[Yutaka Go]

Let me show you all an example of "cheating" in photography

china fake tiger scandal

 

[Snappers143]

wah... a true Pro!

How about pack all your things go out then dont come back...:sweatsm::sweatsm::sweatsm:

 

[Snappers143]

Shooting your best friend's wife naked without his consentment is cheating.

Yo Man, this one, is a very serious offense...:angry::angry::lovegrin:

 

[DarkPa1adin]

Let me show you all an example of "cheating" in photography

china fake tiger scandal

but the image of the tiger is obviously added to the background. the difference in lighting/contrast will tell you that.

 

[DarkPa1adin]

Skilful and artistic manipulation
HDR imaging, stitching

When i first saw a panoramic print, i first thought the photography used a super super super super wide angle lens to make that happen... bcuz in filmmaking, some of the aspect ratio are wider than 16:9... quite wide yet the height v short...

 

[johnlim]

I realised, those people who think editing is cheating are normally those who don't know how, lazy to learn or has no talent for digital editing. When comparing to enhanced photos, they often self console and feel proud that their photos are raw while others cheat.

We only say someone cheat when he edited a photo and deny about it!!!

Anyway it's the digital age... Editing is digital darkroom.. It's part of digital photography!!

Totally agreed with u. :think:

Sometime, I couldn't understand what they really mean when they talk about being original. Even if the photo is overexposed/underexposed or has a color cast, they don't edit it?

And, if they want to be a step closer to originality, then they should use the standard lens (50mm lens for full frame cameras) exclusively, because the way it renders perspective closely matches that of the human eye; It delivers a very natural, unforced perspective. Shooting with a wider or longer lens clearly deviates from what the eyes see.

Though things are looking right with a 50mm, it doesn't cover a wider view which the eyes can perceive in a scene. So what'? MOve a few steps away to cover the scene? But the original viewpoint has already been changed.

There is no way to be original in the ulitimate sense.