I generally have a problem with composites if they are not represented as such. HDR is usually obvious, focus blending is no big deal to me but can be fairly obvious, as is stitching for field of view/panorama.
It\'s not really a problem online, it seems like people are relatively forthcoming about technique, and forum members are relatively open about asking if an image is a composite.
Where I have had a problem with it is at local contests which are often based on prints, and were under the umbrella of PSA or New Engand Camera Club Council. We would have these contests with fairly strict rules about manipulation, if you won the local contest you might get a chance to submit to the regional contests. Composite images were forbidden in just about every category I remember, and people would constantly win these contests and then you\'d discuss the image with them afterwards when \"mingling\" and it would become completely apparent the image was a blatant composite/digital art and not a photograph. (I.e. adding and subtracting major elements, swapping clouds in, etc..) That really bugged me as someone who stuck to the rules and would lose because I stuck to the rules. And the club would NEVER retract the prize or even discuss it even if the photographer told the whole group they broke the rules.
In those cases the rules were pretty clear, so it was easy to get bothered.
Jun 18, 2013 at 10:40 AM
Previous versions of bboule's message #11628223 « Blended landscape images - legitimate or not. »
