Digital Imaging and Computers Forum

Digital Imaging and Computers Forum This forum is for discussing digital photo processing, including RAW image conversion, Photoshop techniques, digital photography workflow, digital image management, and anything else related to digital image processing.
Digital Photography Software Guide >>
Read and Write Photography Software Reviews >>
Read and Write Photo Printer Reviews >>
Computer Reviews >>
Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    Likes to play in cemeteries GraveyardMistress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    26

    Interesting article about photo editing

    I'm not sure if this is the right place to put this, but I read it today and wanted to share. It seems that researchers are looking at more ways to spot editing in digital photos to prevent "hoaxes" and such.

    Researchers Look To Spot Photo Hoaxes


    But who doesn't do some type of editing to their photos, even when they use film?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Medley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, OR, USA
    Posts
    919

    Re: Interesting article about photo editing

    Which is exactly why much of the burden of proof falls to the photographer, IMO. Anyone who has done digital editing knows how easy it is to alter a photo. But Photoshop offers a way to cover your bases. I add a detailed history log to the EXIF data of every image I edit. It records every setting of every process in the image editing, from the Camera Raw plug-in, to Levels commands, to final sharpening. It's an open book to what you've done with the image. With it, a person can take the original file straight from the camera, apply the exact same adjustments, and achieve the exact same results. The only two arguments left are that the original file was manipulated, or that the process of adding an adjustment caused the computer to alter the image to some degree. If I know I'm doing work for an attorney, I like to record the image on the camera's internal memory to counter the first argument, because it's hard to convince a judge that the image was manipulated in-camera. Providing a copy of the original image allows the judge to determine the possibility of the second argument.

    The history log settings can be found under the Preferences> General setting in Photoshop. There are three choices for the history log: Sessions Only- records only the opening/saving of a file (if memory serves), Concise- records adjustments made, but not settings (Levels, Sharpening, etc...), and Detailed- which is explained above. You also have the choice to add the history log to the metadata, as a text file, or both.

    I've done photography work for divorce attorneys, and have had my work challenged on two occasions (I've had creative Photoshop works published in magazines, and opposing attorneys like to hold it up as proof that I can expertly manipulate an image). In both instances, when the history log was explained and demonstrated, the challenges were summarily withdrawn.

    I agree with Adobe's position on this. We need to come up with a better way to determine the accuracy of an image. But we in the field can also do a lot to further the cause.

    - Joe U.
    I have no intention of tiptoeing through life only to arrive safely at death.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •