fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

FM Forum Rules
Landscape Posting Guidelines

FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

3 4 5 end

Archive 2021 · I feel like I'm cheating?

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · I feel like I'm cheating?

OregonSun wrote:
...read up on the Non Fungible Token (NFT) art scene.

A part of the scene that brings to mind at least two associations:

1. The historic Dutch tulip "mania" or "bubble."

2. Money laundering.

;-)

Mar 12, 2021 at 10:32 AM

mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · I feel like I'm cheating?

fotofoow wrote:
While I generally try and take the view that it's the final result that matters in the pursuit of art, this doesn't feel like art to me. Taken to the logical conclusion, is it art if the entire photograph is produced with AI algorithms? I think that it cheapens the work of photographers who through skill and persistence produce outstanding photos...

In this case, the photographer chose the specific characteristics of the sky to achieve a desired mood for the photograph, probably filtered by personal experience of sunsets in the area where the photograph was taken, and then used the AI as a tool to make the sky blend realistically with the rest of the scene to result in an evocative, aesthetically pleasing scene. Is this not an expression of human creativity that the AI merely served to facilitate?

As to cheapening the work of other photographers -- what about those who just happen to be in the right place at the right time to capture a beautiful sunset? Does that cheapen the work of photographers who spend days looking at weather reports and scouting locations and sitting for hours until the perfect moment arrives? Sometimes just as much of a photograph can be attributed to luck as to persistence and skill.

But you do raise an interesting question of whether AI-produced compositions can be considered "art". Lots of people have been debating that, from art historians to philosophers. A composition produced entirely by an algorithm sold for $430,000 at auction in 2018, though I suspect that has less to do with the piece's intrinsic artistic value and more to do with the novelty of the work itself and "who" produced it, as it usually does -- but only the buyer can know for sure.

The interesting thing about art is that as humans, we've made it pretty predictable. This is how it's able to be created entirely out of algorithms and has been shown to elicit the same feelings in viewers who have not been told whether the work was produced by a human or AI. That is to say, so much of the nature of art depends on how other people view it, not solely on the creator's intent.

Mar 12, 2021 at 11:13 AM

starlights
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Its beautiful.

As for cheating - it would be cheating if your purpose is to accurately represent the scene (example, for editorial)

In this case, the photograph you present is your "vision" of the scene as you perceived it to be in your mind's eye and in that case what you termed as cheating is just a "creative process" to get to the final image in your vision, atleast in my opinion.

Mar 12, 2021 at 12:05 PM

Harold Carlson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · I feel like I'm cheating?

I think the actual sky replacement was nice. It fits well with the scene. I do like the composition of the scene as well.

Overall, it's a little too saturated for my taste. You can see evidence of this if you look at the left side of the house which is blue. I understand shadows, in general, come out blue but it's a little much IMO.

Mar 12, 2021 at 01:28 PM

Camperjim
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · I feel like I'm cheating?

chez wrote:
I'd hate to see things get to the point where one can purchase a bunch of sky images that they just incorporate into their images...that in my mind would be going backwards in photography.

There nothing new about changing out the skies for the Landscape forum. Over 5 years ago I noticed that one of the popular posters on the Landscape forum had reused the same sky several times. They actually won thread of the week two times with that same sky.f I have two close friends who do digital art. One stopped photographing and just builds the images from work posted on the internet. The other still uses their own photographs as starting points. The use of Topaz and other presets and filters has been popular for years.

Some of us are not into serious post processing. I usually stop at similar operations such as cropping and dodge and burn, but that is clearly the exception. I see little difference between substituting a sky and popping an image beyond all recognition.

Mar 12, 2021 at 03:01 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Camperjim wrote:
There nothing new about changing out the skies for the Landscape forum. Over 5 years ago I noticed that one of the popular posters on the Landscape forum had reused the same sky several times. They actually won thread of the week two times with that same sky.f I have two close friends who do digital art. One stopped photographing and just builds the images from work posted on the internet. The other still uses their own photographs as starting points. The use of Topaz and other presets and filters has been popular for years.

Some of us are not...Show more →

So Jim did you ever use Velvia or Kodachrome to "pop" the colour? I see zero difference between exaggerated colours of Velvia ( which was a rave in it's heyday ) and increasing saturation with digital images. Both lead to colours which are not in the real world.

As far as changing out parts of an image, I never liked it when done in the film days, and don't like it done in the digital days. But we all have that line we draw.

Mar 12, 2021 at 03:14 PM

Chaz
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · I feel like I'm cheating?

All commenters here are photographers of one skill level or another and either amateurs or professionals.

Hypothetically, now, enter the world of the non-photographer; a tourist couple visiting one of many galleries exhibiting photos in say, a town like Jackson Hole.

You the photographer are showing a beautiful scene of the Grand Tetons near sunset taken on a day in which the sky was a blank canvas of pale blue, contrasting drearily with the dramatic, majestic mountain peaks.

Fortunately you have studiously been photographing skies and clouds from many angles and conditions saved in your "Non-bland Skies" folder.

You selected a beautiful complementary sky from your folder and drop it in using the new "Sky Replacement" tool, now much easier than fiddling with layer masks and haloes, etc.

A beautiful photo now aesthetically more pleasing.

The non-photographer tourists find it just perfect for a memento of the trip and will be pleased to enjoy it in their living room for years to come. They have no idea the sky came at a different time and maybe place. They enjoy your "photos" photo none-the-less. As I said in this thread earlier, my criteria when browsing a photo gallery: "Do I like it and do I like it enough to buy it."

You have sold a print and they have purchased a memory.

I say to this, "No harm, no foul."

What say you?

Mar 12, 2021 at 03:52 PM

sum1sgrampa
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #8 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Chaz wrote:
All commenters here are photographers of one skill level or another and either amateurs or professionals.

Hypothetically, now, enter the world of the non-photographer; a tourist couple visiting one of many galleries exhibiting photos in say, a town like Jackson Hole.

You the photographer are showing a beautiful scene of the Grand Tetons near sunset taken on a day in which the sky was a blank canvas of pale blue, contrasting drearily with the dramatic, majestic mountain peaks.

Fortunately you have studiously been photographing skies and clouds from many angles and conditions saved in your "Non-bland Skies" folder.

You selected a beautiful complementary sky...Show more →
I say why should I care what some tourist wants to buy in a gift shop. The enjoyment of photography for me is mostly the challenge. The only thing that keeps me motivated to keep returning to a scene, a marsh, or a river, is the hope that maybe today will be the day when it all comes together. If that challenge is removed by AI, then I personally would lose interest. And I would definitely feel like I had cheated. But I only shoot for myself. Those who cater to other people's preferences may feel differently.

Mar 12, 2021 at 04:26 PM

Camperjim
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Chaz wrote:
.......

The non-photographer tourists find it just perfect for a memento of the trip and will be pleased to enjoy it in their living room for years to come. They have no idea the sky came at a different time and maybe place. ..........

What say you?

Fortunately I am retired and do not need to make sales. Nor do I pay much attention to what the masses like. I don't even need to care what is popular on this forum and find I spend less and less time looking here. Instead I belong to a couple of critique groups of artists in my area and I am more inclined to bounce ideas off of them.

Mar 12, 2021 at 04:31 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Chaz wrote:
All commenters here are photographers of one skill level or another and either amateurs or professionals.

Hypothetically, now, enter the world of the non-photographer; a tourist couple visiting one of many galleries exhibiting photos in say, a town like Jackson Hole.

You the photographer are showing a beautiful scene of the Grand Tetons near sunset taken on a day in which the sky was a blank canvas of pale blue, contrasting drearily with the dramatic, majestic mountain peaks.

Fortunately you have studiously been photographing skies and clouds from many angles and conditions saved in your "Non-bland Skies" folder.

You selected a beautiful complementary sky...Show more →

I say why even buy a camera to take photos...just sit in your recliner and purchase some stock photos of various things and build your own "art" to sell. You make a sale...customer takes home a memory. No harm no foul...right?

Mar 12, 2021 at 04:36 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · I feel like I'm cheating?

sum1sgrampa wrote:
I say why should I care what some tourist wants to buy in a gift shop. The enjoyment of photography for me is mostly the challenge. The only thing that keeps me motivated to keep returning to a scene, a marsh, or a river, is the hope that maybe today will be the day when it all comes together. If that challenge is removed by AI, then I personally would lose interest. And I would definitely feel like I had cheated. But I only shoot for myself. Those who cater to other people's preferences may feel differently.

It's just today's culture of taking the easy route rearing it's ugly head. I too take photos for the enjoyment and challenge that results in accomplishments that I'm proud to hang on my walls or other people's walls. When people ask me about the photo and what it was like being there, I can honestly answer them.

I guess everyone has differing needs that drive their photography.

Mar 12, 2021 at 04:40 PM

sbeme
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · I feel like I'm cheating?

First, Jim I think the image is beautiful and shows talent in capture and in working with the sky replacement tool very well.
Second, the question of cheating is partly in the mind of the photographer, partly in the viewer.
I like Chaz example about the tourist buying an image, pleased with the evoked scene. The trouble I have is if the purchaser/viewer assumes this is photo reality and not artistic license. How far does that license extend? Not sure. One reason I like IR and BW is that the images are clearly interpretive. There is less assumption, at least on some folks part, that this is what they would see.

Occasionally my non-photographer friends ask "did it really look like that?", usually a reflection of the beauty of the capture, the distance from their experience, and some tweaks to vibrance/saturation that I, perhaps in artfully, applied. I always answer their questions openly.

On this forum in particular there are many gorgeous images reflecting time, effort, skill in the field and in post-processing. Many are not realistic but powerful, engaging, impressive, enjoyable. Sometimes knowing the unreality of the image it turns me off and a more natural scene draws me more.

As far as my own idea of "cheating", besides disclosure when requested, or choice of medium (BW, toned, IR) which makes it moot, sky replacement, moving objects, clean up more than a few small objects in an otherwise plausibly photorealistic capture is too much. If an image has shallow DOF I feel there is more license.Time lapse/water blur, sky blur, movement blurs state something is an artistic choice. I am sure more examples spring to everyone's mind

Great thread. No final answers. Ethics for photographer/artists!

If the OP is OK, I'd share a street image that works well, but was dismissed by a photojournalist because of processing. He shuns processing but also lives to a different ethical standard.

Scott

Mar 12, 2021 at 05:00 PM

Camperjim
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #13 · I feel like I'm cheating?

chez wrote:
.......

It's just today's culture of taking the easy route rearing it's ugly head.........

Well, it is easy to use post processing tools whereas learning to shoot well, to compose, to communicate visually is difficult and can take a lot of time, effort and study.

I think there is another even bigger factor. Anyone with a cellphone can take a photo and some especially at internet sizes are pretty nice. To stand out from the crowd can mean more and more use of the saturation slider, more neon colors, more post processing WOW factors. If that fails, the next step is night photography or even better deep space photography. Neither can be accomplished with a cellphone camera.

Mar 12, 2021 at 06:04 PM

jim allison
Offline
• • •
[X]

p.2 #14 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Today there are artists making paintings that mimic photographs and visa versa. If we are making images to be experienced as art does it really matter as long as there is full disclosure? Most of my work was social documentary on film but, even then I dodged, burned and cropped selectively. The second your eye hits the viewfinder the creative process begins. There is really no such thing as objectivity in art. I think I will be content to continue using this new tool, with truth in labeling, as it presents me with a wonderful opportunity to expand my portfolio without leaving home. No guilt! I will still derive pleasure from making these images.

Mar 12, 2021 at 06:31 PM

SergeyT
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · I feel like I'm cheating?

jim allison wrote:
I started to play around with Photoshop's sky replacement tool. This so easy to use and resurrected many missed opportunities!
Hell of a lot of fun, but I feels like I'm cheating.

I was not aware that the sky replacement tool allows to time travel..

As to the point of concern - it all depends on intent and presentation.
If you are doing it for yourself - pretty much everything is acceptable, especially if you're having fun along the way.
Cheating starts when the piece (image) is miss-represented.

Mar 12, 2021 at 10:36 PM

Chuck s
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · I feel like I'm cheating?

I think that if the focus would be on the house, then the sky would just be an addition.
So I would change the title to "Maine Homestead" and put the house as the center of focus.
Chuck

Mar 12, 2021 at 11:11 PM

matthewsaville
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · I feel like I'm cheating?

So many opinions! Everybody has something to say about not listening to others' opinions, what images sell prints or post cards in gift shops, pursuing your creative passion, and why art should have no limits.

Unfortunately, people almost always ignore the elephant in the room, the most obvious fact:

You can't call it "a" photograph, (emphasis on the singular) once you start combining multiple photographs. It's digital photo composite art. But, calling it that sounds less attractive than the glamorous title of "photograph", for some silly reason.

Thus, some artists fear that their work will be less appreciated if they pull back the curtain and admit that the moment depicted never actually happened "that way". They either flat-out lie, or they seemingly innocently omit crucial details about major elements in a scene, and just let viewers believe that it's all still just photography.

(I'm not pointing any fingers here, especially not in this thread in particular; in fact, in general I've seen much progress overall in the last ~15 years here on Fred Miranda, compared to the attitude taken by some 5-10+ years ago, when an angry mob might shame you mercilessly you for even suggesting that a photo was a composite.)

Oppositely, what do you get with disclosure? You get to sleep at night knowing that your work is being appreciated for the right reason- that you had a vision, and brought it to fruition. Your skill in the "digital dark room" gets to be appreciated, and if that is where one of your strongest talents lies, then why hide it? Unless you're twisted enough to enjoy the act of deception, you'll always feel better if your work is appreciated for the right reasons.

Let me finish by saying, this is a beautiful image. A photograph? No, not grammatically speaking. Art? Yes, absolutely, and nobody is arguing that. Disclosure, as exemplified in this post here, will help you sleep at night.

...just a (factual) thought for those who are thinking that it's "no big deal" to completely fabricate half their work, and throw it in with the other half of their portfolio of "real" moments. ;-)

We all pursue this craft for different reasons. For some, the biggest driving factor is simply creating a final image, a work of art. For others, the whole process of photography is merely a tool to record things you see, unbelievable sights that actually happened, yet make people ask, "is that real?"

You decide which answer makes you feel more proud of your work, and aim your creative pursuits accordingly.

Mar 13, 2021 at 02:41 AM

Jinny Montpeti
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Good job!!!!

Mar 13, 2021 at 04:17 AM

Camperjim
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · I feel like I'm cheating?

jim allison wrote:
Today there are artists making paintings that mimic photographs and visa versa. If we are making images to be experienced as art does it really matter as long as there is full disclosure? Most of my work was social documentary on film but, even then I dodged, burned and cropped selectively. The second your eye hits the viewfinder the creative process begins. There is really no such thing as objectivity in art. I think I will be content to continue using this new tool, with truth in labeling, as it presents me with a wonderful opportunity to expand...Show more →

It seems you asked for comments on replacing the sky but you already had firm beliefs about this anyway. I am curious, why do you feel the need for "full disclosure" and what is that? Are you going to attach a label stating that you replaced the sky? Or just disclose that if asked? What about the bright blue rocks in the driveway, or the neon colored grass or the intense reds on otherwise green foliage? Are you also going to explain that those were enhanced also?

If you are going for shock and awe photography with mass appeal then go for it without "disclosure" or apologies. Everyone else on this forum with that style does so without the need for any explanations.

Mar 13, 2021 at 07:27 AM

sbeme
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · I feel like I'm cheating?

Mar 13, 2021 at 09:31 AM

1 2 3 4 5 end
FM Forums \| Landscape Photographer \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 end