Is photo shopping false advertisement

[Joel Thompson]

We are trying to put together some marketing at the ranch I work at and it has really opened up my eyes to how much photos are “doctored” in this day and age. It makes me start wondering if anything we look at in magazines or on the web is even real!

I have seen our marketing group edit out powerlines, vents on cabin roofs, and add lush green grass where dirt only currently exists.

Is this false advertisement?

Joel

[Zach Matthews]

Joel –

Legally, no, of course not.

[Joel Thompson]

Zach you bring up some very good points there. And I see nothing wrong with the photographer shooting the proper angle to eliminate something undesirable from the photo. However, when you start adding stuff to the photo via a computer program I just don’t think that is right.

Here is a perfect example of what I am talking about. This is a picture of our Creek Club at the ranch. (It is a fitness center/bar incase you are wondering.)

Our marketing company has added the grass in front of the club. Now if one of our members sees this picture and comes for a visit it puts me in an uncomfortable postion of trying to explain why there is grass in the picture and not in reality. Granted most people will understand, but there always a few that will think you are trying to pull a fast one on them.

Joel

[Zach Matthews]

Hmm.

[Joel Thompson]

Yes it is already seeded, but there will be no grass until June of 2008 as our growing season is done here. Hopefully we will have snow soon and I won’t have to even worry about it. 😉

JT

[david king]

Given that the alternative to grass was probably dirt I wouldn’t worry to much. The average Joe would probably think you had a nice place and wouldn’t be put off at all. When your landscaping is better shoot another picture or hire a good pro to shoot it and put it in your brochure when you reprint. I do a lot of image manipulation and some is transparent and some is the lesser of 2 evils. Not everyone is a Photoshop maven that would notice the cloning and color.

[Carter Simcoe]

I’m all about some manipulation of the color saturation, contrast, hue and stuff like that hell it’s the main reason I shoot in RAW but patching stuff in the post-edit to add/take stuff away from the photo (other than dust spots and stuff) is just cheap.

[Morsie]

I think the path looks worse than the grass.

Morsie

[Don Thompson]

There aren’t too many people

[John Bennett]

At the end of the day it depends on how the photo is going to be used.

I removed somewhere between 30 and 50 people from this picture of Peggy’s Cove.

Its amost imposible to take a picture here without including the tourist that all over the place. Theres literally bus loads being dropped every 10-15 minutes. Theres nothing at all “wrong” with that imo, nor do I think there’d be anything wrong with it were it used for marketing and advertising purposes, in travel magazines. In fact Id be extremely surprised to discover that Post Cards and travel brochues that use images of the Peggys Cove Lighthouse didnt do just that.? Not at all imo.

I dont think thers been a “product” shot in the last 30 years that on some level wasn’t false advertiing. I dont know about you but Ive never received a Burger that look as good as the ones I see in adds 🙂

I think theres really only two area’s where creative editing should be taboo and intolerated. One is contest (unless specifcaly open to digital creations), two and most importantly “photo-journalism”. You don’ have to look hard to find examples of Photographers who ha lost their jobs and credibility for doctoring images that were destined for editorial content etc.

[Author]

Posts