Lightnings taking a ride

by ceinmart

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

56

The hosts of the wedding chose, for whatever reason, to hire the "official" photographers to document their event. As a guest of those same hosts you should respect the choice they have made and make every effort to accommodate your hosts wishes. If those hired are less than welcoming and courteous to you, you should still respond to them in a way that ...


36

Editing is definitely not unethical (making a deceptive photo can be unethical, but it is also easy to deceive in-camera, it's the deceiving part that makes it unethical not the editing) There are two very different types of photography - there are photos that are intended to show what something really look like (photojournalism, pictures for eBay listings, ...


32

I agree with apparently everyone else that the "ethics" depend entirely on context. Here are some examples where I think editing is straightforward: 1800s: You could get a "headless portrait" with your head in your lap or on a pitchfork. Unproblematic. I doubt anyone thought that these were real. 1800s: Eadweard Muybridge became famous for his pictures ...


31

I have found that the best technique is to leave your equipment at home or at a minimum in your vehicle. Let the paid professionals capture the images they were hired to capture and you enjoy the event as the hosts intended; as a guest.


24

I am going to respond to this as the photographer. If and when I am covering a wedding or such an event as you have mentioned, I get really frustrated by guests bringing their DSLRs with them. To the point where I have actually spoken to the bride's mother and suggested that I want so and so to put their camera away as I am finding it a distraction. Don’t ...


19

Considered by whom? This is both an issue that has intrigued and bothered people since the dawn of photography and a still-emerging topic that is far from settled. So, in a larger sense, there's really no meaningful answer, just a series of opinions. But, in a specific sense, there certainly can be an answer. The definition you've taken above has a very ...


19

There's a tendency these days to think that photo editing is a modern phenomenon, when in fact it's nearly as old as photography itself. How 'ethical' editing is depends on the genre and the expectation of the viewer. One would expect photojournalism to use little editing other than basic exposure adjustment, whereas an artistic landscape or portrait shot ...


14

I'm a gallery represented artist and I want my work to stand for what it is when you see it, not the process I went through to make the piece. I don't do things like add sky, not because it is "wrong" but just because it isn't what my vision does. My tools are my camera, my lenses, my tripod, my miscellaneous gear and of course my laptop and host of ...


11

I believe what you are asking for here is the correct combination of words to make a professional photographer understand your reason and logic, and allow you to keep snapping pictures. The problem is when you look at it from the angle of the people actually hired to take photos. Let's try another. I'm a DJ by trade. My niece is getting married. She ...


10

The action of editing is neither ethical nor unethical. What you do with the resulting images is what counts. Those who manipulate their images to deceive are doing something unethical. If you are just doing it to produce an artwork which pleases you better, than you manipulate at will and still sleep well at night. Ultimately you have to chose what your ...


10

Yes it is. In fact, I've seen many photographer contracts for a wedding explicitly call out whether or not the photographer will be getting a meal. I've read on some forums that some photographers require a meal, but I think it's in better to taste to make it an "option" on the contract. If the client said it was okay, then it's okay. Now, of course you ...


10

I would expect a professional to simply say, "Sorry, I didn't realize I was disturbing you," and stop shooting the same subjects at the same time. You can still be in the way, even from behind. People don't like ruining other people's shots. You're forcing them to commit little microagressions against you every time they get in your way or make you move. ...


8

The reason you see photomontages, or as its often called photomanupulation, on photography sites is it is a form of artistic expression with photography. It is not painting, or drawing, or sculpting. Such works are always composed of photography, and even though they are not a single-shot image, neither are the myriads of HDR/Enfused photos which also litter ...


8

This addresses only my opinion on one less-central aspect of the question: I agree that the more extreme forms of what you describe are unethical or immoral. As well as avoiding mistreatment of the target animal, I would personally never use live-bait for anything, but that's a personal choice and many would be happy to do so. But I don't see too much ...


8

I adopt an "opt out" approach. I assume everything is edited unless it is explicitly stated that this is not the case. I use the same approach, therefore I wont label every photo as being edited, but if I capture something particularly unusual or hard to believe in which case I'll say "this was straight out of camera!", or "this hasn't been composited in ...


7

I think there's a couple of points here: There's one set of things that a professional photographer might find annoying and another set that might make an innocent guest feel insulted. But since lines are not sharp it behooves both sides to step back and create some sort of a "demilitarized zone" in the middle. i.e. There's a range of behaviors that most ...


6

This question is a little subjective and is going to get views from both sides of the fence. Short Answer Do what you want to deliver the vision that you see Be aware of rules/dogmas/standards Accept that afore mentioned rules/dogmas/standards can be broken Be prepared to push your boundaries and improve your artistic and photographic capabilities Long ...


6

One time, when my grandma was in assisted living, I snapped a photo of my sister, her, and me together in her livingroom. While she and my sister chatted, I photoshopped the picture so that we were on a beach in Mexico. I showed it to her, and she was startled and confused - living far inland in the US, even trips to the beach were rare for her, and she had ...


6

Check your contract. If ambiguous, talk to the client. If uncertain, ask a lawyer (or just forget about it, as that lawyer will likely cost you more than you'd ever get from selling the shots). That's the most definite advise you can ever get here, as we haven't seen you contract, don't know the law where you live, where the client lives, and where the ...


6

All photos are manipulated, simply because all photos are merely a piece of a larger picture, and by taking that piece out you lose the context they were taken in. Does this mean that we shouldn't make rules? Well, no, obviously there is a code of ethics in certain cases (i.e. photo-journalism and documentary photography) where the point is to honestly ...


6

There is no nice way to do something unreasonable. What you are trying to achieve is not possible because it is based on a fundamentally wrong premise. It is rude, arrogant and demeaning to approach a professional trying to do their job and suggest you know better. The way you have responded to answers and comments on this thread indicates that you would ...


5

Professional don't do shoot and deliver the products for free. Would you visit a restaurant ask for a free meal just to test how good they are? Wake up, the only reason for asking for the raw files is so that they can get it processed and printed elsewhere.


5

People can do whatever the rules allow and/or what they can get away with. You don't have to like it. FWIW (possibly only what you paid for it) I personally tend to feel that photos are usually (not always) diminished by editing that substantially alters what was captured or seen (which are certainly not always the same thing) AND I accept that the ...


5

You should only ask yourself, if the edits fits into the genre or not. Of course works for documentary and journalism should generally be free of any manipulations, but even in those genres editing should be ok as long as it doesn't affect the message that the photo is supposed to deliver. For anything else that you can call it "art", any kind of ...


4

As for the legal issues, the crux of the matter is the model release. All of the reputable micro-stock websites that I've looked into (Shutter Stock, iStockPhoto, Fotolia, etc.) are going to require a model release if your client is in any way recognizable. Traditional stock agencies will have similar requirements. Even if your existing contract includes a ...


4

In the very least, you'd need a model release from the client, if they appeared in the photo. Possibly also a location release. If the client is important to you, consider whether you would do harm to the relationship by attempting to sell the images through another channel. While some clients would not mind - after all they understand that you need to have ...


4

Excluding working as a photographer for someone else, there are really no rules in Photography. Which means, you can make up your own rules for yourself and use those self-imposed rules as part of your style or as structure for your own creativity. I try to avoid judging anyone else's rules as unethical or wrong. That said ... for me control over the tones ...


4

Have to agree with Gapton and Steve here...your client is trying to swindle you, no question there. They used you for free, and are not trying to get YOUR product, the actual photography, for free. A client has no reason to need or want a RAW file...they should be paying for a professionally finished product. Tell them NO! Its the responsible, professional ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible