My best pic of the day

[paw42uk]

Very good photo of the pansy, what did you use to take it?
Paul.

[SouthDowns]

Very good photo of the pansy, what did you use to take it?
Paul.

Do you mean my flower shot? Just asking because I don't think it's a pansy

If so, thanks . It was taken from about 2m away using a Sony SLT A65, with Sigma 70 to 300mm zoom in macro mode and at 300mm.

[barewirewalker]

Is it Stitchwort, it shows a lot of white in along hedgerows now that field herbicide spraying has become more precise, quite a favorite of mine when it first shows at the beginning of summer before the more rampant summer growth of later flowers break it up and overpower its impact. A lovely combination with bluebells.

[barewirewalker]

Me too, though I guess it's not much different to photoshopping a background in!

I can promise mine are real!

I wonder what is acceptable, I am looking for a shot of a kingfisher in flight taken from above. I would like to recreate a moment, some few years ago, when Mrs BWW and were sitting on a river bank with our feet dangling about 4 feet above the surface of the water, when a kingfisher flew right under the soles of a boots.


A momentary glimpse that would have been impossible to capture, but could be recreated in Photoshop. Just need the king fisher shot, still got the boots and legs and I know where the river bank is.

[stratus_cloud]

Thanks Tracey and everyone else. That puffin was clearly after a modelling fee; he stood on a rock about 6 feet from all the long lenses, just sitting there taking direction!

This one was much harder to get; they don't hang about once they're in the air!


20120624-112225.jpg by MarkBerry1963, on Flickr

Ahh, puffins    IMHO fantastic photo 

[AdamBorzy]

Splendid photos. It’s interesting alright how people use photoshop to make their pictures look great but I find it more amazing how others detect those are just a product of photoshop creations. It’s a person’s skill to easily detect fraud I guess because of today’s technology it’s extremely difficult to find out real vs fake pictures without the use of any sophisticated software to analyze or view the information.

[SouthDowns]

I think it depends on what the image is for, and, again depending on what it's for, the degree of Photoshopping that's done. I have plenty of Photoshopped images in my "portfolio" (ooh, get me!), but would never claim any of those were real.

ALL of the following are perfectly valid:

- An image almost entirely created in photoshop as a piece of art.
- An image enhanced to better convey the feeling the photographer was trying to communicate (you'd be amazed how much just changing the temperature tint of an image can change its feel).
- A completely untouched image used to record a fact.
- A completely untouched image used to demonstrate the photographer's skill with the camera.
- A heavily re-touched image used to demonstrate the photographer's skill with Photoshop.
- An image re-touched to remove a distraction, such as the tourists who refused to move out of the waterfall you were trying to photograph.

About the only thing that's NOT acceptable is claiming an image is what you saw when it's not.

Images have ALWAYS been manipulated, whether in processing, or with filters, or with differing camera settings. The only thing that's changed is the technology used to do it.

My flying puffin shot above is re-touched to remove some other distracting birds; you can't direct birds, and a painter would have simply left them out, so I see nothing wrong with that; it doesn't change the truth of the picture, just makes it nicer to look at.

This one is also re-touched, but it doesn't matter because there's no suggestion it's true; it's ALL about the end result. Can you spot the false bits? :


W16 - Pride 3.jpg by MarkBerry1963, on Flickr

By the way, that one is in some ways MORE real than any of the 5 shots that go to make it up, because it tells you what happened over a matter of minutes in a way that an untouched photo never could. It's like a film all compressed into one frame . It also took more camera skill/knowledge than one that wasn't intended for Photoshop, because in order for it to work I had to pay attention to much more than I normally would.

[angry climber]

How did you get five kids to dress the same for you? 

[SouthDowns]

How did you get five kids to dress the same for you? 

MacDonalds

[angry climber]

MacDonalds

 

[fincaman]

Some great pics here

[yorksgal]

Excellent 

[ukjeeper]

'Discovered' this hidden gem of a lakeside several years ago, and promptly forgot where it was. Has taken me all this time to accidently find it again. Not a great picture (smartphone), but hopefully it portays what i find special about it.
 

[barewirewalker]

I can understand from the picture that which you experienced there. The dimensions of the image are neatly wrapped up in the triangle of your 3 points of interest.

[Glyders]

What a lovely spot Jeeper 

Is that in Essex?