1
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The 2026 Wildlife Photographer of the Year Awards have been announced
Posted on 10/15/26 at 6:21 am to LegendInMyMind
Posted on 10/15/26 at 6:21 am to LegendInMyMind
I love these posts. It’s really hard to tell what is AI versus what is real. I can only imagine what the future holds.
Posted on 10/15/26 at 6:43 am to LegendInMyMind
Your post is more organized than the website itself 
Posted on 10/15/26 at 7:26 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Not really my issue with the image tho. It's the light. How can the sun be setting in the background while the top of the monitors head have bight illuminated highlights? Look at the image critically. The light and shadows don't line up correctly. It looks like the light is coming from above and the direction of the camera at the same time (not to mention the sunset going on in the background). Something strange is going on in it.
quote:
Lonnie Utah
Posted on 10/15/26 at 7:29 am to andouille
quote:
One of the examples were some by the great Ansel Adams.
110% true. Adams understood that a photograph is not simply a recording of reality. Even before digital photography, photographers made deliberate choices about exposure, contrast, tonal values, composition, and how they would effect the look of the final image. Adams was a master of these techniques, using them to interpret a scene and communicate his artistic vision. He spent HOURS and HOURS in the dark rook making subtle refinements to his images before producing the final images we know today.
Among the essential texts for any serious photographers is his series of 3 books called "The Camera, The negative and The Print". Although these books were written in the film era, their principles remain highly relevant in digital photography. Understanding exposure, dynamic range, tonal relationships, contrast, and image interpretation is just as important when working with a digital sensor and editing software as it was with film and a darkroom. The tools have changed, but the underlying principles have not. I still use his concept of the zone system when shooting landscapes.
For any serious photographer, these books are essential because they teach more than technical settings. They explain how to think about the entire photographic process, from visualizing the image before pressing the shutter to making deliberate decisions about the final result. Digital cameras and editing software can automate many tasks, but they cannot replace the photographer’s understanding of light, tone, and artistic intent. Adams’ trilogy provides a foundation for making those decisions with knowledge and purpose.
This post was edited on 10/15/26 at 7:31 am
Posted on 10/15/26 at 7:41 am to HoustonGumbeauxGuy
quote:
I love these posts. It’s really hard to tell what is AI versus what is real. I can only imagine what the future holds.
I think most of the images are "real" in this regard. They are images captured by the cameras and not digitally generated images. However, in the case of some of these images, I think they might be multiple images composited together. Very easy to do in today's world. In fact, photoshop even has a "Sky replacement" menu item. It basically lets you drop an image of any sky into any image with a sky. Now, weather it looks good or believable, that's another matter.
(not my image)
And having done this for a long time, I think that's the issue most people have with highly manipulated images. Do they look like reality (and does it matter)? If I use a filter to darken a sunrise to bring our more colors in the sky to make up for the physical limitations of my camera, is that a manipulation? What if I do the same thing using digital software? I can tell you the second way is WAY easier than the first and give you much more control. What I think the "problem" is many photographers take it too far and transform their work from photography into "digital art". Now there is nothing inherently wrong with that, it just how do you present what you are doing to the public. It's a philosophical debate with no right and wrong answer because art is intended to involve a response and emotion and those type of images certainly do that. It's just not to my personal tastes and that's ok too because taste in art is subjective....
This post was edited on 10/15/26 at 7:43 am
Posted on 10/15/26 at 7:53 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Does any part of the photography world have reservations about altering photos?
Only with AI. Otherwise, "altering," as you put it, has been done since cameras were invented. Every single photo you see has been edited.
Posted on 10/15/26 at 8:04 am to BottomlandBrew
quote:
Only with AI. Otherwise, "altering," as you put it, has been done since cameras were invented. Every single photo you see has been edited.
I will admit in this space, that I do use AI to edit some of my photos. Shoot for a few of the local high shcool MTB teams. They try to have a "good" "clean" photo of every kid on the team for the end of the year banquet. Sometimes it's just not possible give the layout of the courses and the number of spectators. I have used AI to remove spectators from the background or a bike tire or other small distracting element in the frame when I cannot crop in close enough to remove those things. The reason I do it is I want every kid in every photo to look like a "rockstar" so to speak. While the photos are real, I'm also trying to create an illusion to make every athlete feel good about themselves and their season. If removing the orange tape they use to mark the course in some places enhances that illusion, I'm OK with it. Could I remove these things "manually"? Yes. Am I lazy? Also yes. I spend hundreds of volunteer hours doing this and if I can shorten the process I will. But I also know there are limits to how far I want to push the technology. I'm not dropping them into the lead peloton in the tour de France. lol.
Posted on 10/15/26 at 8:06 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Define "enhanced". Does it mean cropping a photo? Because I could do that in the darkroom back in the 80's. Does it mean exposure adjustments? Because I could do that in the darkroom back in the 80's. What about processing it for more or less contrast? Because I could do that in the darkroom back in the 80's.
It’s pretty well established you can’t do anything that couldn’t be done in a darkroom. But even that has gotten more restrictive in the past couple of years with the new monster megapixel sensors that can achieve super high ISOs. If you truly need super depth field, you should either be using a medium format sensor that will get you to f/64 or you need a tilt/shift lens. So EXIF data makes it really easy to screen out a lot of images.
I get this message a couple times a year every time someone gets popped submitting questionable images.
quote:
Please note that Getty has implemented AI in their image database to flag images that have been manipulated. Not edited, but manipulated. We were informed by Getty that they rejected a batch of images that were processed through Topaz. Photographers are not allowed to use any AI or similar manipulation software to edit your images. You are not allowed to use noise reduction software like Topaz. Getty Images, AP, and Icon consider the use of AI and noise reduction software like Topaz as image manipulation. Image manipulation is potentially career ending in the editorial world and should not be taken lightly. Furthermore, anything beyond cropping and MINOR editing (like minor toning) in Photoshop or Photo Mechanic is not allowed. Please check your settings as sometimes AI is implemented in image editing software by default. Everything needs to be turned off.
Posted on 10/15/26 at 8:11 am to Lonnie Utah
Fr sure. I meant for competitions like this. I've seen some rules that they won't even allow AI denoise. I have no problem with AI usage in your scenario.
Posted on 10/15/26 at 8:23 am to BottomlandBrew
quote:
Fr sure. I meant for competitions like this. I've seen some rules that they won't even allow AI denoise. I have no problem with AI usage in your scenario.
So regular noise reduction is ok, but AI noise reduction isn't? Curious. I think I get it, I mean you have to draw a line somewhere I guess.
And I went back an looked thru my photos from the last race. I couldn't find a clear cut example of what I was talking about that I could share. (I like did it at some point, but just couldn't find a clear cut example) But this race I was way out away from most of the crowd. Hiking away from everyone is WAY easier than spending time editing out spectators in PS.
Posted on 10/15/26 at 8:27 am to LegendInMyMind
Elephants are awesome
Posted on 10/15/26 at 8:28 am to LegendInMyMind
Prompt: take this photo and make it look like a painting
Posted on 10/15/26 at 8:33 am to NorCali
quote:
So this guy could be the one that killed the puma and tied it to the fence. Maybe he was hoping to lay the big cat on the fence for a shot and say the cat was alive but then it kept falling off so he tied him to the fence post and went with that? That picture in that setting seems awfully sketchy.
It's common to tie predators to the fence to keep other predators out of the area. A ride through south Texas or the Hill country and you'll see coyotes hanging from fencelines.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News