Very nice photos!
Originally Posted by
bdjohns1
If you can't accurately judge whether an image has been manipulated, then what's the point?
I think the definition is simpler than that. After all, the camera manipulates the RAW image before it outputs a JPEG. The amount and type of manipulation done by the camera depends on the processing setting you choose. RAW images, unprocessed, usually look like garbage, no?
This is FlyerTalk, not a professional gallery driven, megabuck contest. The voters will be your FlyerTalk peers. The injunction against substantial manipulation is based on the honor system. To my mind "substantially changes" would not mean cloning out a sensor dust spot, but it would include cloning out, say, an automobile, or changing the color of said automobile, or adding AS livery to a 777.
The image should generally reflect what you saw through your viewfinder. If manipulating contrast or color balance is what it takes to achieve that, I'd say go for it.
I posted a photo of a leaping dolphin in Trip Reports recently. I think it is a lovely photo (and quite hard to capture to boot). Problem is that dolphin has a remora attached to him. I wanted to clone it out, but I didn't.
Actually, this sounds like a perfect discussion for the proposed Travel Photography forum
