Post Processing or Photomanipulation... hmmm....

[tristansandwith]

What are everybody's opinions on the differences between these two?

IMHO photoshop is a tool for both but the differences are massive, namely post includes all enhancements made to photos that do not change the fundamental image (this includes cropping).

I would like to hear what everybody else thinks, and when post goes past the point of being just post and becomes manipulation!

[jiro]

This question will generate a lot of interest and response but I think it won't get that far. This is more like semantics to me. Go deeper and just concentrate on your vision, that will guide you on your post-processing. If you're a purist, even a simple cropping is already a technical photomanipulation since you are deleting pixel data.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Tristan,

We've had this question asked a few times in the past -- one such similar thread can be found here.

[tclune]

It's post processing if I like the result, and photo manipulation if I don't...

[arith]

B+W is manipulation nowadays: I'm working on this by separating the building and background, altering colours and forcing drama into the sky.

I'm wondering if there is too much blur to simulate DOF as it now stands out too much, I know I have to refine the mask.

Is it manipulation or drama?

[tristansandwith]

This is what I was getting at I agree with the rest in that anything, even cropping, could be considered manipulation, i.e. selective or total desaturation and blurring and contrast, the list goes on.

If we look at arith's image... the picture there is still the same one that he captured. However, had he taken that shot into PS and blended in a mountain scene in the background, that would have fundamentally changed the image and scene itself, that to me is the manipulation. What he's done to "give the frame more drama" is post processing. But that's just my opinion

I'm glad people have shared their opinions, thank you!

[AlanP]

If you do anything to the file it is post processing. In order to process the image you have to maniputlate it. The two words mean the same thing, though in common usage manipulation often implies greater changes.

Steve,

The mask that you are applying increases the blur from the bottom of the image to the top. A more realistic image would blur from the base of the building, with the blir increasing in the background and foreground.

Alan

[Colin Southern]

I agree with the rest in that anything, even cropping, could be considered manipulation

So perhaps the question becomes "why is it important to define what is processing -v- what is manipulation"?

In my opinion, so long as it's not done to deliberately deceive, basically, "who cares what we call it"?

Sometimes people will ask my if I "Photoshop" my images - the answer is of course "yes" and the reason is of course "to make them look better"; whether that's Photoshopping to overcome the limitations of the digitisation process - or correction of white balance - or removing litter ... so long as it's not promoted as being "verbatim" (as is photo journalism or perhaps criminal evidence", I don't see it as a problem or even anything worth mentioning.

I guess one could argue that adding makup or even clothes to "look better" is no different.

[arith]

The mask that you are applying increases the blur from the bottom of the image to the top. A more realistic image would blur from the base of the building, with the blir increasing in the background and foreground.

Cheers Alan; I've refined it a bit now and are waiting for comments, before I could say it is finished. So I suppose I should put it here but it is a bit different, Oh I suppose it won't hurt. Intermediate.