photographers - photo editing?

The removal of people/objects looks great, as long as it looks good, which yours does. The colors in the first seem a little orange/yellow, but overall they look good!

 

I think the editing is acceptable and directs the attention to the car by eliminating back ground noise and distractions. I think the editing of the car for sales purposes such as taking out bad glares or reflections is ok as long as it does not misrepresent the car. Example: make a 20 yr old finish look brand new or removing that scratch on the fender or removing that dent on the door with photo shop!

Photos look great

Greg

 

I think no editing is just wrong! LOL

The first is perhaps too orange-ish. It fits because the car is old, but it would look odd with anything else.
If I have to nit-pick, the C6 Vette is too blue ...
Looks like you increased the contrast, especially in the last 2. I've found that often removing the darker tones (via the Curves function) and enhancing color saturation yields nicer results, you may want to give it a shot.

Hard to tell if the editing is done properly at such low resolution, though.

You can also use the Unsharp Mask filter (assuming you use photoshop), it will enhance the sharpness. Very nice tool.

If you want to enhance the reflections on a car, duplicate just the body, and set its blending mode to "Screen". Then play with opacity.

 

To me the photos look great when you edited them, well before to...lol.

Its your photos, so whatever you want to do with them will work, removing unecessary objects does attract more attention to the car, then people wondering what are those people doing in the back.

And also people wont notice the difference since you will not show them the origional but the edited one, so they will think that was the origional.

Have fun, i also just started to slowly edited my photos, but havent figured out to edited people and stuff...lol

john
www.fotoveloci.com

 

IMO - for "art", any kind of editing goes; for journalism/documentation, no editing allowed.

 

I can see what your saying, but many car photographers edit their photos, such as croping is a biggie. Its your photos so its up to you to see what looks good.

BTW...what camera do you use?

 

I know from experience that there is nothing wrong with photo editing...I am a motorsports photographer, and you need to edit EVERY picture in one way or another....Dust on the sensor, color correction, removal of unwanted objects(other photographers is a big one!), cropping etc. Its the new direction of photography. In a way it sucks to be honest....You cannot trust anything anymore. You see a nice picture, and the first thing that you say to yourself is "thats photoshopped". As long as you don't do stupid things like fake blurs!

 

Nothing wrong with editing at all (except of course in certain situations such as journalism)

 

My .02 cents:

On the Corvette, the two plants draw my attention to them more than the car.

The middle pics - there is too many angles in the foreground, and the background is too much in focus.

Same for the third set - the background trees are too in-focus so the car kinda blends in with them.

I'm NOT saying these are bad pics, but you want to be aware of your foreground and background so they don't draw your eyes to them, and away from the subject, no matter what the subject it.
I'd back away and use a tele if you had it, or go to an aperture like 2.8 or 4 - the lower the better less depth of field.

 

LOL-im so happy you said that! Im in school for automotive photography and a teacher I have is obsessed with using photoshop more than doing things right in-camera. He encourages us to blur the background in PS and worst of all...blur the wheels.

Ummm...why is the caliper spinning??? lol

-Jessica

 

There's nothing wrong with editing at all. They've been doing that since photography was invented.

Just one note. Watch out for things growing out of the cars, e.g. bush, posts, trees, etc. Although it's not always possible, it should be avoided as much as possible.

 

I don't see any problem with it.

Infact, I'd maybe like you to do that to a few recent photos I took! Good editing skills!

 

Wow. Those are great! Especially the Boxster pics with editing out the reflection. I certainly cannot do that! Only thing I do, is mess with the colors for sunset/sunrise photos, to make the colors pop more. I'll make everything b&w in a picture, except a car or something to that effect. Or if I did a macro photography shot, I'll fix more blur on the unwanted object if there isn't enough in the natural photo.

 

In the 'Vette shot, I would get rid of the blue handicapped parking signs as well. They're a big distraction.

 

The worst offender for this is Classic and Sports Car magazine -- their covers are sometimes so poorly photoshopped that I cringe. They shoot a car standing still, then radial blur the wheels and blur the background. Sometimes they shoot the car in a studio or building and add a background. Ugh. The magazines pretty much all do it, but some do it very poorly.


Webby -- that last pic is hillarious!


For what it's worth, I crop, and adjust levels, brightness/contrast, hue/saturation, and occasionally curves to bring the picture back to look more like what I actually saw. I use editing to correct where the camera/film didn't come through, and show to others the eye of the beholder (me).

I make a strong effort to have the composition balanced and light appropriate when I take the shot; I try to eliminate the need to use Photoshop to correct shadows or remove subjects from shots. I don't worry about the perimeter too much, as I can crop it. But for light, I will go to the site at a specific time of day to have it at the angle I want, and watch for trees sprouting out of the car, etc. I sometimes temporarily move garbage cans and once even edged a lawn and removed grafitti for a shot!

But usually, if there is an element I don't want, I try a different angle or move the subject slightly. When every imperfection or distraction is photoshopped out of a picture, it starts to look fake. Little things like people walking by, a crack in the pavement, a dead leaf, or a bit of grafitti, etc. -- aka reality -- make the photograph seem, well, more realistic. Not every photo needs to look like a calendar shot!

My idea of "photographic honesty" is to only edit to bring it to what it looked like to me at the time it was taken. Nothing against any other styles -- to each his own!

 

Here is a good photography forum. I am a member on here, too.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/

 

Wow are you serious?! You have made me speechless! They should get a talking to....