Digital manipulated photos


Status
Not open for further replies.
Sep 9, 2002
452
0
0
Visit site
#1
Some competitions have rules that photos cannot be digitally manipulated. Just curious how does one check whether a photo has been digitally manipulated? Say one shoot in Raw and has to do raw conversion to jpeg and he adjusted the exposure, sharpness before conversion? Is there a way to check? Even directly manipulating a jpeg photo also cannot tell right? :dunno:
 

Royce

New Member
Aug 25, 2003
538
0
0
Singapore
www.roycelithgo.com
#2
I don't see how they could tell. Some manipulations maybe - eg. bad cloning or patching work. But for the fairly basic stuff you mentioned, don't see how.
 

teL

New Member
Jul 8, 2003
339
0
0
44
Singapore
engloy.elcreations.net
#3
shutterfly said:
Some competitions have rules that photos cannot be digitally manipulated. Just curious how does one check whether a photo has been digitally manipulated? Say one shoot in Raw and has to do raw conversion to jpeg and he adjusted the exposure, sharpness before conversion? Is there a way to check? Even directly manipulating a jpeg photo also cannot tell right? :dunno:
As far as I do know, some authorities do not consider exposure/sharpness adjustment to be true manipulations. Traditionally even, techniques to achieve these "enhancements" already exist and is a reflection of how technically skilled you are in printing the shot. The digital darkroom has just made it easier to achieve the effects of yesteryear.

However, digitally editing a person out and putting another subject in its place would be considered to be manipulation. I think in some competitions, this is what the organisers do not want to accept. This is especially so for competitions that try to promote photojournalism: Journalism should report the truth (although in this day and age, they hardly do so all the time :p ).

Regards.
 

S

snapper_001

Guest
#4
teL said:
As far as I do know, some authorities do not consider exposure/sharpness adjustment to be true manipulations. Traditionally even, techniques to achieve these "enhancements" already exist and is a reflection of how technically skilled you are in printing the shot. The digital darkroom has just made it easier to achieve the effects of yesteryear.

However, digitally editing a person out and putting another subject in its place would be considered to be manipulation. I think in some competitions, this is what the organisers do not want to accept. This is especially so for competitions that try to promote photojournalism: Journalism should report the truth (although in this day and age, they hardly do so all the time :p ).

Regards.
You are not replying to the poster's question.

Why do you have to reply and sound like you are very knowledgable ?

ARPS - so wat ?

If you don't have an answer - you can actually keep quiet.

sigh ....


I agree to Royce's view - simple manipulation, don't think they can detect.
 

jes

New Member
May 31, 2003
37
0
0
#5
snapper_001 said:
You are not replying to the poster's question.

Why do you have to reply and sound like you are very knowledgable ?

ARPS - so wat ?

If you don't have an answer - you can actually keep quiet.

sigh ....


I agree to Royce's view - simple manipulation, don't think they can detect.
i found tel's post useful.

although it did not provide a to the point answer, it added some thoughts to ponder upon, which may help produce an answer.

i do not think that it is a prerequisite for one to know the EXACT answer in order to post in this forum. we all share our thoughts and views in order to learn.

no personal attacks please.
 

teL

New Member
Jul 8, 2003
339
0
0
44
Singapore
engloy.elcreations.net
#6
snapper_001 said:
You are not replying to the poster's question.

Why do you have to reply and sound like you are very knowledgable ?

ARPS - so wat ?

If you don't have an answer - you can actually keep quiet.
I admit that my first answer may be a little off topic. I am just voicing my thoughts on the topic of digital manipulation. If you don't like it, you are entitled to your opinion... Take it or leave it (or keep quiet, if you want to) ;p

What I am trying to say in my reply is that I don't think we should interpret the rules as they are at face value, that exposure adjustment should not be classified as true manipulation. To me, manipulation is when the "reality" portrayed in the shot is altered.

As to answering the initial question on how to detect manipulation: no matter how skillful a person is in altering the scene, there are always tell-tale signs of manipulation -- maybe the lighting on the added subjects doesn't really match the scene, or the shadows cast by an added object appear out of context to the general scene, or there are some hints of masking artifacts... It is up to the skill of the "manipulator" to make these hints as inconspicuous as possible, and also up to the astuteness of the "inspector" to detect them. Look at special effects movies like Star Wars and the Matrix: it is the objective of the special effects production team to make the fake look real. In most cases, they are successful in doing so... but in some instances, it is pretty obvious that what they have shown couldn't possibly have been real (Jar Jar Binks comes to mind).
 

teL

New Member
Jul 8, 2003
339
0
0
44
Singapore
engloy.elcreations.net
#7
jes said:
i found tel's post useful.

although it did not provide a to the point answer, it added some thoughts to ponder upon, which may help produce an answer.

no personal attacks please.
Off topic here... but thanks jes. I agree, we are all here to learn and share that's all.

Cheers.
 

Pepper

New Member
Mar 27, 2003
236
0
0
West
Visit site
#11
FYI. There are software that could detect whether a pic has been manipulated. The Press has them. Local Press like Straits Times has them. :)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom