Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NV Whino

(20,886 posts)
3. As a painter I would never have included that branch
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 09:39 PM
Jul 2014

I see photography (except photojournalism*) as art, and I have no qualms about removing distracting items.

On a personal note: a couple of years ago I created a panoramic postcard for a client. I had a great photo of his beautiful vineyards. But, there was one of those damned electrical lines running through it. No way to frame and miss it. I debated whether to remove it or keep it. It was, after all, selling the ambiance to potential wine buyers. Truth in advertising and all that. In the end, I elected to remove it. My rational was, people viewing the vineyard would see only the beautiful vineyard and not the electrical line. We do tend to have selective vision. And we were selling the wine, not the property.

The only time I do not alter a photograph, except for exposure or sharpness, is real estate photos. You can get in a world of trouble removing telephone poles in real estate photos.

*photojournalism can be art, but you may not alter it.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Photography»Water Falling Over Things...»Reply #3