Daily Archives October 29, 2007


Before we get to the news; I hope I’ll see you tomorrow at the Tampa Convention Center for the only Florida stop of my Lightroom Live Tour. The final stop will be in Honolulu, Hawaii on December 3, so if you can’t make Tampa, this is a semi-legitimate excuse to go to Hawaii on a “Business trip” (wink, wink). Here’s a link to the Tampa Seminar details.

Now, onto the Monday News:

  • Apple released Leopard (their latest Operating System, which totally rocks by the way) on Friday night, and by 6:00 pm EST Terry White (from Terry’s Tech Blog) had posted the “Green Light” for Leopard compatibility with Photoshop CS3, InDesign CS3, and Adobe Illustrator CS3. Here’s the link to Terry’s site, which includes a link to Adobe with their offical details on which applications are affected by the Leopard update; and which will need an update. It’s mostly good news.
  • Later today we’ll be posting the name of the winner of a signed copy of my iPhone book along with an Apple iPhone itself. Keep your fingers crossed.
  • The Pro Digital Photographers site over at Lexar.com has posted the third of my video tutorials, and the latest one “Giving your images that Hollywood Look, Part 2” details more of my Hollywood Portrait Effect. Here’s the link.
  • Last week, I mentioned attorney Carolyn Wright’s interview over at “The Digital Photography Show.” Well, Scott Eccleston over at the Weekly Photo Tips blog, mentioned her excellent blog, and I thought I’d provide a link to her “PhotoAttorney.com” blog, as well as one’s to Scott’s Weekly Photo Tips blog as well. So, there ya go.
  • Want some Monday photo inspiration? Then check out the very slick portraits of New York photographer Carrie Schechter. Make sure you visit her Avertising Portfolio, and within that her New Work, Stories (these look really complicated), as well as her Music galleries. I just love her work, and it’ll start your Monday off right. (Here’s the link).
  • Lastly, make sure you scroll down to the next post for my post on “Photo Editing Ethics.” It’ll make ya stop and think.

See you tomorrow in Tampa! :)


A couple of weeks ago, RC, Corey, Matt and I were sitting around talking about photography, as we basked in the afterglow of a triumphant Bucs win (which sadly we did not enjoy yesterday after our one-point loss to the Jaguars). Anyway, we wound up discussing what we feel comfortable doing to our photos, and the more we talked, the more it became clear that each of us has our own personal “Photoshop Moral Code” or our own “Photo Editing Code of Ethics.”

Basically, since none of the four of us are photo journalists, I guess we each keep an internal list of what we will or won’t do to a photo, and still be able to sleep at night. Now, as a “Photoshop Guy” you’d probably think that since I know how to do a lot of things in Photoshop, that I’d want to. But if you’ve been reading this blog for any time now, you know that my goal is to do as much “right” in the camera as possible, and use my time in Adobe Photoshop for finishing my photos, and not “fixing” them. That being said, here’s a short list of my internal guidelines; my own personal “Photo Editing Code of Ethics” for what I will or won’t do to one of my photos.

  • (1) This may sound silly, but I absolutely hate cropping in Photoshop, and go out of my way to avoid it. I want to do my composing in the camera, so if I wind up having to crop later in Photoshop, I feel like I didn’t “Get it right in the camera,” and it drives me nuts.
  • (2) I have no qualms whatsoever with removing any distracting element in my photo. So, if there’s a distracting telephone wire, or a sign, or a piece of trash on my beach photo—it’s gone. No questions asked.
  • (3) Although I don’t think twice about removing an object from a photo, I don’t like to add anything to a photo that wasn’t there when I took the photo. In fact, I hate it. For example, even though I know how to replace a bad sky in my photo, with a sky from a different photo, I have to be really, really, really desperate to do so, and I can count on one hand the times I’ve done it. The reason I hate it is; personally I know “I cheated,” and I’ll never look at that photo the same way again.
  • (4) Although I don’t want to add anything to a photo, I have no problem whatsoever with duplicating something in my photo. For example, if I take a photo of a child standing in a pumpkin patch, and there’s a empty spot to the child’s right, I’ll clone one of the other pumpkins in the photo over that empty spot to fill in the gap. My personal Photoshop moral code says; “If it’s already in the photo, it’s OK to have more of it in the photo.”
  • (5) I feel like I should make the final image look as good as it did when I took it, but if it winds up looking a little better than the original, or a lot better than the original, I’m fine with it. In fact, I’m happy with that. So, if the grass wasn’t as green as I remember it (or I would like it), it suddenly becomes greener. If the sky was kind of gray that day, it won’t be when you see my final image.
  • (6) I think nothing of: double-processing my images (exposing one version for the foreground, one for the sky, and combining them in Photoshop), or making creative choices with White Balance after the fact, that might turn a dusk photo in a dawn look. I also don’t think twice about creating a “look” using Photoshop, but I don’t like to use effects filters. I know, I’m weird that way.
  • (7) When it comes to retouching people, I have a simple guideline: Make them look as good in print—a medium where each and every flaw will be magnified—as they do when I met them in person, and if need be, I’ll use each and every Photoshop retouching trick I know to reach that goal. In fact, if it’s a portrait or headshot of me that needs retouching, I will actually hire teams of people, working in round-the-clock shifts, using large mainframe computers, with the mandate that they continue retouching my portrait until I look at least somewhat like George Clooney. Clearly, these teams are still at work.

Here’s perhaps a weirder thing; my Photoshop code-of-ethics only applies to photos I’ve taken myself. If it’s someone else’s photo, and they ask me to edit it in Photoshop, then all bets are off, and anything goes. I’ll use anything, and everything in my bag of tricks to make their photo look the way they want it to, so I definitely have a double-standard.

Now, there are two things I need to clarify: (1) I am not in any way trying to impose, or convince you that these should be your code of editing ethics. That is totally a personal decision, and you have to decide what you feel you’re comfortable with, so I was just sharingâ”not dictating or instructing on any level. And (2) I can’t defend any of my decisions listed above. In fact, I can’t even give you solid reasons how I came up with my list of what I will and won’t do, and why some things I find totally acceptable while other things absolutely make me cringe. It’s just how I feel about my photos, and about how I feel about editing them, so it’s a totally personal thing.

Now, if you’re not a photo journalist (who is bound by the strict rules of photo journalism, which I fully support), I imagine you probably have your own personal set of rules–your own “Photos Editing Code of Ethics” (even if you haven’t sat down and thought about them in that light), and I’d love to hear some of your own guidelines, so I encourage you to share them by posting a comment here.

I’m interested to know where you “draw the line,” and what you’re willing to do, or not do in Photoshop to create the type of images you feel good about. Thanks for “baring your soul” here, and giving other readers some insight into how you feel about your photography and editing them in Adobe Photoshop.