Comments on: Photo enhancement going too far?

By: Gary R Boodhoo

Gary R Boodhoo — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 07:03:21 +0000

Most people are three dimensional.
Most photographs, retouched or otherwise, are two dimensional.

Most people reflect different visible colors.
Some photographs show only values of black/white.
Some photographs record parts of the electromagnetic spectrum not visible to the the naked eye (infrared light, polarized visible light, etc…)

Most people have features with particular measurements that don’t change.
Any photograph can be shown at any size.

Much depends on the intent of the photographer, but traditionally, portraits have always exaggerated, eliminated or abstracted features of the subject.

By: Allen

Allen — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 21:12:52 +0000

I guess it all depends on what the photographer is trying to accomplish. Is this an “art” piece where someone will look at it and know instantly that it was retouched? If so, then go for it. Photoshop artists are artists too. However, if you’re trying to pass off a retouched photo as reality then I think that’s a bit wrong. A little retouching is OK, but making it so that you can’t recognize the person in the picture unless you’re told who they are is something else entirely

By: Phil

Phil — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:35:27 +0000

I think minor retouches are okay, but a total makeover (as above) is just creating an entirely new person.

As you said, a lot can be done with lighting, composition and cropping to help in the first place.

I have, at my wife’s request, given her virtual breast-reduction surgery in some shots of her that were shared with family. I’ve also removed skin discolorations, smoothed wrinkle lines (NOT totally removed) and lightened bags under eyes. I think these changes match your theme that people have memories about how others look, so I’m returning the person to the way others remember them, thinner, fewer wrinkles, etc.

But I wouldn’t try to remove 40 extra pounds, increase bust size, make them look 20 years younger, etc.