# My photos are NOT OK to edit.



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Actually, mine are fine to edit. What I think of people who choose "NOT OK":

1. They are arrogant, or ignorant. 

2. They think they are better than you, therefore you are incapable of producing an image better than their original.

3. They are old, or unwilling to learn.

4. They don't realize the insignificance of other people's opinion on the internet.

5. They hate photoshop.

In any case, their existence online is hypocritical, get with the times.


----------



## cherrymoose (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> 3. They are *old*, or unwilling to learn.



*raises eyebrows*


----------



## Icon72 (May 12, 2007)

Or they would rather not have people mess with their photos. I know it sounds crazy but it's a choice the forum allows individuals to make.


----------



## Stretch Armstrong (May 12, 2007)

You forgot one:

6. The are new to the forum and upon registering didn't know what they were doing and picked that setting and haven't yet changed it because they haven't posted any shots.


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Someone at least play devil's advocate, and give a good logical reason...


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Stretch!!! You win, that is actually a great reason. I doubt there are any better than that though...


----------



## LaFoto (May 12, 2007)

See_this ... and I'll move your post to the Photographic Discussion, too, since it is totally not OFF TOPIC.


----------



## Stretch Armstrong (May 12, 2007)

Well, I already kinda felt like a douchebag about it but I figured I would change it once I had mustered up my cojones enough to post something.


----------



## LaFoto (May 12, 2007)

To be calling those who made the decision to have the NOTE sign out "arrogant", "ignorant", "old", "unwilling to learn" and more is pretty arrogant, to my mind.

And who's saying that all the photos you get shown on here are their out-of-the-camera originals, who's to say that not some present only photos to the public they have spent a long while in editing them themselves first and later do not really want anyone else to mess with their work?

How's that arrogant or ignorant if someone presents a what they think is a finished piece of work here that they don't want changed by others who are so arrogant that they think they know a lot better???


----------



## Stretch Armstrong (May 12, 2007)

LaFoto said:


> To be calling those who made the decision to have the NOTE sign out "arrogant", "ignorant", "old", "unwilling to learn" and more is pretty arrogant, to my mind.
> 
> And who's saying that all the photos you get shown on here are their out-of-the-camera originals, who's to say that not some present only photos to the public they have spent a long while in editing them themselves first and later do not really want anyone else to mess with their work?
> 
> How's that arrogant or ignorant if someone presents a what they think is a finished piece of work here that they don't want changed by others who are so arrogant that they think they know a lot better???



Now be calm, or I will contact the site coordinator.:greenpbl:


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

LaFoto - My apologies, this post does look better suited to this forum. Also, you may remember this quote, "Well, to be quite open and frank I often get the feeling, mostly so in The Critique Forum, that those who just go about _changing_ someone else's photo and thus _adapting it to their own tastes_ actually don't offer any help at all, they mess with someone else's work."

It is this kind of mentality that people use to put creative handicaps on themselves. It is very helpful for someone else to put their personal spin on an image, in order to help you see a photographic world outside your own. It really does offer help, but some choose not to see it. I believe this falls under the second half of number three.


----------



## Mitica100 (May 12, 2007)

> 3. They are old, or unwilling to learn.


   

As long as it is a personal choice I don't think there is a need for discussion here. You either have the choice of OK or NOT OK TO EDIT. Good for you for choosing the OK but don't put other people down because of their choice is the opposite of yours and more than anything, do NOT play the 'age' card in your posts. It's unfair to a lot of 'more mature' (or grown-up) posters on this Forum.  

Thank you and continue enjoying the Forum.:greenpbl:


----------



## abraxas (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> Actually, mine are fine to edit. What I think of people who choose "NOT OK":
> 
> ...
> 
> In any case, their existence online is hypocritical, get with the times.



None of the above. I think it's a personal choice and a choice made in most cases for personal reasons.

--
Whoa, I must be getting really, really old.  I started replying about 20 minutes ago.


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

LaFoto said:


> To be calling those who made the decision to have the NOTE sign out "arrogant", "ignorant", "old", "unwilling to learn" and more is pretty arrogant, to my mind.
> 
> And who's saying that all the photos you get shown on here are their out-of-the-camera originals, who's to say that not some present only photos to the public they have spent a long while in editing them themselves first and later do not really want anyone else to mess with their work?
> 
> How's that arrogant or ignorant if someone presents a what they think is a finished piece of work here that they don't want changed by others who are so arrogant that they think they know a lot better???


If you think it is arrogant to say that people who are unwilling to learn are arrogant, then I accept the label...except I am willing to learn...so I think you may be wrong.

Just because someone spent a lot of time editing an image doesn't mean it wont benefit from another adjustment. And how is it messing with an image if you have the copy on your own computer??? Are you really concerned about some 150k image you posted in some forum online?

And to follow your last sentence, you think it's fine to post a photo on a forum dedicated to improving photographers but then say you can't make any changes?? I think we will have to agree to disagree here, I get the feeling we will never agree on the subject.


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

abraxas said:


> None of the above. I think it's a personal choice and a choice made in most cases for personal reasons.
> 
> --
> Whoa, I must be getting really, really old.  I started replying about 20 minutes ago.



lol, good job keeping it light, I started replying a while ago myself!

Also, I would like to hear a logical reason, but if you consider your reasons private, I certainly respect that. There are too many variables in the world for me to think it's impossible to have a good reason, I just can't think of any...


----------



## LaFoto (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> LaFoto - My apologies, this post does look better suited to this forum. Also, you may remember this quote, "Well, to be quite open and frank I often get the feeling, mostly so in The Critique Forum, that those who just go about _changing_ someone else's photo and thus _adapting it to their own tastes_ actually don't offer any help at all, they mess with someone else's work."
> 
> It is this kind of mentality that people use to put creative handicaps on themselves. It is very helpful for someone else to *put their personal spin on an image, in order to help you see a photographic world outside your own.* It really does offer help, but some choose not to see it. I believe this falls under the second half of number three.


 
Then by all means do so in words. Why not? Why not force yourself to think so much that you have to find the WORDS to describe what you would think makes the photo a better one? There is NOTHING wrong with critique, to my mind, nor with learning from it, and if you had known me from when I first joined this forum until know, you would SEE that I learned, and HEAPS, although (!) I am "old" in your book (!!!), and in a time when the NOTE and OTE thing was not even invented and by default photos on here were NOTE, by default!, so posters had to THINK, make up their own mind on something, and find their own WORDS to describe and help, via text, not via editing someone else's work. 

We have the Photoshop Challenges here, a much neglected sub-forum, which is where people are very invited to post those photos they feel would need some pp treatment that they cannot bring about, either because they are still too new to PS or something similar, or don't even HAVE the kind of software ... no one ever goes there, though. 

I prefer to (still, even in my old age!) learn by doing, not by getting things done by others.


----------



## Stretch Armstrong (May 12, 2007)

Ok, ok, ok . . . so I am 41 years young. Am I in the old group that everyone is talking about?

Go ahead. Give it to me straight. I can take it. Go on . . .


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Just to be clear, I don't mean "old" by any number of age, but by thought process. Also, you must admit, things don't get conveyed the same with text!


----------



## abraxas (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> lol, good job keeping it light, I started replying a while ago myself!
> 
> Also, I would like to hear a logical reason, but if you consider your reasons private, I certainly respect that. There are too many variables in the world for me to think it's impossible to have a good reason, I just can't think of any...



Well, if you're really receptive to learning, you'll learn that there are some very good private/personal reasons too.


----------



## Stretch Armstrong (May 12, 2007)

Cedew, I got ya. I was just trying to interject some fun to lighten up the debate. 

These pro-choice debates always end up this way.


----------



## Mitica100 (May 12, 2007)

There is nothing wrong with accepting a good, constructive criticism from your fellow photographers. There is much to be learned that way. Much more than having your photos edited in ways that, perhaps, you don't agree with. Such is the case with one's personal choice of shooting in color and having someone else edit it, say, turn it into a B/W picture. Has that editing person made a difference in the author's mind? No. 

Now, if someone says to the author "Well... I think it's over (or under) exposed, maybe you can bring out the blah, blah, blah..." and giving a constructive criticism, that author will definitely think about it and try it. More so than seeing his picture(s) altered, I mean edited by someone else. Am I making sense?


----------



## gmarquez (May 12, 2007)

As LaFoto said...didn't we already have this discussion?  :scratch:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=78474


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Stretch Armstrong said:


> Cedew, I got ya. I was just trying to interject some fun to lighten up the debate.
> 
> These pro-choice debates always end up this way.



Ah no worries, it's all in good fun. Nothing written in a forum should get anyone too worked up. I don't really mean it quite as mean as it sounds, but I do stand by my original post.


----------



## danalec99 (May 12, 2007)




----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Mitica100 said:


> There is nothing wrong with accepting a good, constructive criticism from your fellow photographers. There is much to be learned that way. Much more than having your photos edited in ways that, perhaps, you don't agree with. Such is the case with one's personal choice of shooting in color and having someone else edit it, say, turn it into a B/W picture. Has that editing person made a difference in the author's mind? No.
> 
> Now, if someone says to the author "Well... I think it's over (or under) exposed, maybe you can bring out the blah, blah, blah..." and giving a constructive criticism, that author will definitely think about it and try it. More so than seeing his picture(s) altered, I mean edited by someone else. Am I making sense?



I personally think people can convey something better by showing, than by explaining. I think the color/b&w thing may be a bad reference. If I say, "Mitica, you should try converting this one to b&w", and you have planned this image from the start to be in color, you probably wouldn't give it a chance. Also, what if you're no good at b&w conversions, and you DO give it a try but it's super flat. I think you would benefit from seeing it, as opposed to reading it. Also, you can just reply something like, "oh hey, thats neat", and go on about your business if you don't like it right?

As for receiving specific constructive criticism, I think you're right, that helps as well. But, why limit yourself to only one type of criticism? BTW, you are making sense, I just think you're putting a cap on the feedback. Like saying, I will take a little advice...but not too much.


----------



## gmarquez (May 12, 2007)

danalec99 said:


>



I'm with you on that!  :cheers:


----------



## bytch_mynickname (May 12, 2007)

Then there are the people like me, who have no designation because I don't know how to choose one. Or do I have one that I can't see? Now I feel like an idiot.

interesting...


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

gmarquez said:


> As LaFoto said...didn't we already have this discussion?  :scratch:
> 
> http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=78474



I didn't see anything in there that covered it very well. Just the one person who changed it to "NOT OK" because someone posted their photo in DA...not that anyone has any control over that.




bytch_mynickname said:


> Then there are the people like me, who have no designation because I don't know how to choose one. Or do I have one that I can't see? Now I feel like an idiot.
> 
> interesting...



You have a neutral appearance, and don't look like an idiot from my chair.


----------



## gizmo2071 (May 12, 2007)

I post to share my work.
Like an exhibition of my work.
My photos are not ok to edit, as my paintings would not be ok to edit in an exhibition.
imagine somebody walking around with a paint brush and changing my paintings. 
Well I feel the same about my photos.

No offence, but I'm not here to learn by having other people change my work. If you think there's something wrong with my photo, then tell me.
I go to college/uni studying photography to have my lecturers rip my work to pieces. (they're not that bad actually)

So I'm sorry if you cannot comprehend that some people do not want other people to edit their work.


----------



## craig (May 12, 2007)

Welcome to TPF and we respect your thoughts for sure.

Personally I feel your post is heading in the wrong direction. Your post is not based in fact. We are lovers of photography. Generally on this forum we participate as opposed to passing judgement. If you are unhappy with the guidelines take it somewhere else.

Love & Bass


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

gizmo2071 said:


> I post to share my work.
> Like an exhibition of my work.
> My photos are not ok to edit, as my paintings would not be ok to edit in an exhibition.
> imagine somebody walking around with a paint brush and changing my paintings.
> ...



Hang on one second, you simply cannot compare this to someone modifying your paintings because your paintings are all originals, and would be permanently changed. This is not the case in the digital world.

To me, this is the worst, " No offence, but I'm not here to learn by having other people change my work." First off, I can't be offended through this screen . Second, please explain why you are able to handle the criticism verbally, but not visually?


----------



## CannonKid (May 12, 2007)

I'm going to play devils advocate here a lil' : I think sometimes people also don't want their work touched because they want to be able to have the credit of creating that 'stunning' image themselves, they wanna do the conversion so they can boast that it was created all by them, maybe you gave them a nudge in the right direction but they actually DID it.

I don't agree with the 'i wouldn't want my paintings altered in a gallery'. An internet forum where people don't hold the originals, and your here for critique is different than a showcase of your work (unless of course your here for more showcase than critique). I thought that comment was a lil' extreme. 

All and all, myself i don't mind if someone alters my photos because like stated above i hold the originals at the end of the day. And if someone can create something that would be hard to explain - i'd like to see exactly what they were talking about, and if i like the result take it upon myself to ask about and learn the technique used ... but that's just my opinion, maybe i'm just not advanced enough to think i create finished work yet.

Tav


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

craig said:


> Welcome to TPF and we respect your thoughts for sure.
> 
> Personally I feel your post is heading in the wrong direction. Your post is not based in fact. We are lovers of photography. Generally on this forum we participate as opposed to passing judgement. If you are unhappy with the guidelines take it somewhere else.
> 
> Love & Bass



Heya Craig, and thank you. I agree it's starting to look that way. But, is it me, or the replies that make it that way? You say in general people here are opposed to passing judgement, is it because some limit the amount they can be judged? I am certainly not unhappy with this forum, I think it is an EXCELLENT resource for anyone looking to learn anything about photography. Perhaps I made a mistake when I thought we could engage in a healthy debate? Perhaps some folks let themselves get too excited by text on a screen? We aren't talking George W. Bush and his war of terror, nor are we mocking what Adam and Eve's children must have done to help the human population. Haha, jk jk! But, we should really keep it light or this will only have negative effects. If you guys are getting upset or are offended, I will quit my end of the debate, just holler.


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

CannonKid said:


> I'm going to play devils advocate here a lil' : I think sometimes people also don't want their work touched because they want to be able to have the credit of creating that 'stunning' image themselves, they wanna do the conversion so they can boast that it was created all by them, maybe you gave them a nudge in the right direction but they actually DID it.
> 
> I don't agree with the 'i wouldn't want my paintings altered in a gallery'. An internet forum where people don't hold the originals, and your here for critique is different than a showcase of your work (unless of course your here for more showcase than critique). I thought that comment was a lil' extreme.
> 
> ...



Very well said.


----------



## abraxas (May 12, 2007)

You're not understanding that a personal choice is just that- personal.  When someone explains something to me with the phrase, 'personal', I understand it to mean none of my business, and I accept it at that.  A few have tried to explain why they have made this 'personal' choice, yet it doesn't seem to be good enough. This is why things become 'personal', because if you can't understand it, respect the judgement of others when it comes to their choices and have to pass judgements on them, well, it's really none of your business.


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

Hey guys, I always was happy with people editing my photos and reposting them _here_. But this thread makes me want to switch to the *NOT OK to edit *side !


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

abraxas said:


> You're not understanding that a personal choice is just that- personal.  When someone explains something to me with the phrase, 'personal', I understand it to mean none of my business, and I accept it at that.  A few have tried to explain why they have made this 'personal' choice, yet it doesn't seem to be good enough. This is why things become 'personal', because if you can't understand it, respect the judgement of others when it comes to their choices and have to pass judgements, well, it's really none of your business.



What are you talking about? You are the only one who said you chose it for "personal" reasons, and I questioned you no further. Did everyone else say it was for personal reasons and I just missed it? I'm reading, but can't find that...


----------



## abraxas (May 12, 2007)

Alex, I'm sure you have your reasons .


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> Hey guys, I always was happy with people editing my photos and reposting them _here_. But this thread makes me want to switch to the *NOT OK to edit *side !



You should definitely join the elite organization, I hear it automatically makes all your photos perfect.


----------



## abraxas (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> What are you talking about? You are the only one who said you chose it for "personal" reasons, and I questioned you no further. Did everyone else say it was for personal reasons and I just missed it? I'm reading, but can't find that...



And everyone here has tried to let you know why they have made a personal choice- but you refuse to accept what they have tried to explain as valid. Yep, you're missing it.


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

abraxas said:


> And everyone here has tried to let you know why they have made a personal choice- but you refuse to accept what they have tried to explain as valid. Yep, you're missing it.



My mistake, I thought you meant the word personal by its definition...meaning private to ones self. If they actually give the reason, its no longer personal. You said your reasons were personal, which I assumed you meant it by definition, so I did not try to get you to disclose your private reasons. But uh...yeah, I guess I missed it.


----------



## Garbz (May 12, 2007)

Ever considered that not everyone posts in the Critique forum? By my last count there is only 1 critique forum, and yet a general gallery, a people and pets gallery, ... etc.

My photos are NOT OK to edit anywhere on this board, since I only post completed works of my own. When I post in the Critique section (and I have seen a few people do this) I say on the bottom that it is ok to edit that one?

And before you jump in and say people don't edit things outside the critique forum, they do, and they did, and without my invite, and that's why I changed from OK to NOT OK.


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> You should definitely join the elite organization, I hear it automatically makes all your photos perfect.



This reply shows, that you do not at all understand why people set it to "not ok to edit". I know many of them on here, and they are desperate for critizism, they really ask or beg for it sometimes. And they are very willing to listen to ideas and re-think their work. Just they want to keep control about how and what is done to their images, since it is their original work!

If your sexual intercourse with your girlfriend is not perfect, and someone gives you a hint on how to improve it, then you would well listen and try it out, but you would not want that person to do it for you ....


----------



## cedew (May 12, 2007)

Stretch Armstrong said:


> You forgot one:
> 
> 6. The are new to the forum and upon registering didn't know what they were doing and picked that setting and haven't yet changed it because they haven't posted any shots.



Well after forty days, and forty posts, this is still the best reason. It's time for bed, flame on me all night if you like, I can take it! I won't be replying back in this thread though, I think it's run its course. Thanks to those that made solid efforts to debate.

And if anyone else finds this thread someday down the road looking for answers to the same question I had...look elsewhere.

Happy clicking!


----------



## abraxas (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> My mistake, I thought you meant the word personal by its definition...meaning private to ones self. If they actually give the reason, its no longer personal. You said your reasons were personal, which I assumed you meant it by definition, so I did not try to get you to disclose your private reasons. But uh...yeah, I guess I missed it.



I think you're ignoring the insight some in this thread are trying to provide to you and disregarding the reasoning behind their choices and categorizing them.

I don't understand why you've made the choice you have made regarding editing, but I respect that and don't see a need to know why, and really, I don't care; I'm sure you have your reasons.


----------



## abraxas (May 12, 2007)

BTW, here's the definition of 'personal' I've been refering to;

'particular to a given individual'

Whether revealed, explained, logical or not, it is still personal.


----------



## Funky (May 12, 2007)

wow what a useless topic. honestly. no one cares if they can or cant edit someone elses pictures. cedew is just looking to argue. but the thing is, this community isnt looking to argue about little insignificant things like this. its once again personal wether someone wants their fine artwork to be taken into photoshop by someone else and edited. thats why we have copy rights is it not? we dont want people changing and or selling our work.


----------



## danalec99 (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> And if anyone else finds this thread someday down the road looking for answers to the same question I had...look elsewhere.


You started off with a set of pre-cemented/baseless notions and you expect us to engage in a 'healthy debate'?

There is a different between stating "You all are a bunch of arrogant heads" VS asking "I wonder why one would turn the No Edit option on". 
The latter invites a healthy exchange.

That said, welcome to TPF!


----------



## LaFoto (May 12, 2007)

Ha, Daniel - you speak my words!
This was not meant to be a discussion of an issue, but sweeping judgement was passed on every single member on here (which is very personal!) who decided to have their photos NOTE, how can this ever be a healthy exchange, I wonder? 
And even those who say that they might consider going from OTE to NOTE after they have read this thread get judged as "joining the elite club that makes their photos good automatically", now in how far can this be "light", healthy or fair?

But the OP says to us to "keep flaming him" all night.
Well, who started this?


----------



## gizmo2071 (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> Hang on one second, you simply cannot compare this to someone modifying your paintings because your paintings are all originals, and would be permanently changed. This is not the case in the digital world.
> 
> To me, this is the worst, " No offence, but I'm not here to learn by having other people change my work." First off, I can't be offended through this screen . Second, please explain why you are able to handle the criticism verbally, but not visually?



Why can I not make the direct link between a painting and a digital image?
No doubt a digital image that I have printed off and stored in my portfolio.
Do this not make it an original?
I agree that it wouldn't be permenatly changed as a digital file, but I have no reason for other people to alter my work.

As abraxas has said many times, this is a personal choice. I have no desire for people to modify my work.

I can't see how this makes me:

"1. *arrogant*, or *ignorant*. 

2. think I am are *better than you*, therefore you are incapable of producing an image better than their original.

3. old, or *unwilling to learn*.

4. don't realize the insignificance of other people's opinion on the internet. *This one doesn't make sense to me, these are more ways than just visual opinions.*

5. *hate photoshop*."

If some one has some ideas on how I can improve an image, then fine... tell me and I can try a different technique.


----------



## EBphotography (May 12, 2007)

Just thought I would add a little tid bit, I believe it was ClarinetJWD that said in a similar thread that once someone has edited your photo, they can legally claim it as their own work.  That would be one concern of many and one reason I am thinking of going to Not Ok to Edit.


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

EBphotography said:


> Just thought I would add a little tid bit, I believe it was ClarinetJWD that said in a similar thread that once someone has edited your photo, they can legally claim it as their own work.  That would be one concern of many and one reason I am thinking of going to Not Ok to Edit.



you are right, we had this discussion here ... in a much more civilised manner 

That is also one of the reasons I might consider it. But as I have heard here, it also makes my images better and I become elite  .. don't know were the bitterness of the OP comes from, maybe he just had some bad experience with some arrogant photographer which leaves him a bit biased ...


----------



## duncanp (May 12, 2007)

i'm no where near old =/ maybe abit selfish, i just dont want people using / editing my photos without me knowing


----------



## Chris of Arabia (May 12, 2007)

>;o))


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

Chris, if you do not stop that, you will get very fat!!!


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

My God a post after my own heart but I would have chosen other words. 

*To assume any image you make can not be improve or that you have nothing to learn is foolish.*

The problem with people who post things and say this is not okay to edit is that it gives the impression that everything they post is perfect and needs nothing else. That is seldom the case. I have shot very few images that I consider beyond improvement. I doubt I have ever shot one. 

If I see an image that has a better image locked inside, then see NOT OKAY TO EDIT.. I see not only the oportunity for the one who mde it to have learned something, but I also see it as teaching the wrong lessons to the novice photographer who comes here. 

In my opinion it also gives the impression to others that the NOT OKAY TO EDIT photographer is somehow superior to others here, which I assure you is NOT the case. That his or her work can not benefit from changes. 

Now that may well be true in my case, but I'm pretty sure that on the fifth Friday in febuary, even I might have a minor change that would make that image better. 

As to the edit might make my image worse thinking. Trust me on this forum someone will quickly inform the editor 'your edit stinks'. I have had it said about an edit I thought was a huge improvement.

Even the bad re edit brings on discussion which is what I mistakenly thought a forum was about. I try very hard to obey even the rules I don't like because without them there is anarchy. I see this forum as a help thy neighbor and thy self kind of thing. 

Some people are pretty quick to point out other peoples flaws but overlook their own. In that respect it's a lot like the Baptist Church I once belonged to. (nobody would have sex standing up, They were afraid they might be seen and folks would think they were dancing)

One more small point, I can spend an hour of my time trying to get the words right to tell you to crop to a certain line in the image and nobody can visualize the change, or I can spend two minutes making the crop and everyone here can instantly see whether or not it is better.

As for the its like a painting and you can't change it reference. It isn't like a painting because no one is damaging your original. Your image is copyrighted and is your image.. no one is trying to steal it or forever alter the original. If you are afraid of image theft you shouldn't post it here.

As for the name calling... Yes im old too... No one here is more arrogant than I... Yes I think I am a better photographer than you... No I don't like photoshop....ect ect *but*.....

MY WORK IS ALWAYS OKAY TO EDIT... THIS IS JUST A FORUM IT AIN'T NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC...


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

mysteryscribe said:


> My God a post after my own heart but I would have chosen other words.



And most of the times it is the choice of words which makes the difference 



> The problem with people who post things and say this is not ok to edit is that it gives the impression that everything they post is perfect and needs nothing else.


yes, but as stated above, this is not the message which people wan to bring across when they say "not ok to edit"

the fact that they are around on this forum and ask if not beg for critique means that they want to improve and want feedback. Just some do not want others to touch their work, whether imperfect or not. And that is a valid attitude I think.

Some like to things to be demonstrated to them, others want to learn by listening and then do it by themselves.



> In my opinion it also gives the impression to others that the NOT OK TO EDIT photographer is somehow superior to others here, which I assure you is NOT the case.


I see the danger here too ... but it is just a danger of misunderstanding of the not-ok-to-edit option.

After being around for some time on the forum, every former newbie will have learned that not-ok-to-edit has nothing to do with superior images ... just as a high post count in here is not an indicator for a superior photographer. Still comments from people with high post count on the forum are sometimes taken as the word of the gods on this forum .. so there is a misunderstanding too. So should we now remove the postcounts? I think no reason to do so ... quite soon the newbie will learn to judge people here by there images and by the way they behave, and not by "not-ok-to-edit" flags and postcounts and country and gender and age and whether they like bananas or not ....


----------



## fmw (May 12, 2007)

While CEDEW is really a troll by the definition I understand from the internet, at least he's willing to enter the debate. I'll give him credit for that. The problem he has was starting the discussion by ridiculing and offending people. That's what trolls do, not what debaters do. The discussion was doomed from the start.


----------



## gizmo2071 (May 12, 2007)

Exactly.
This isn't a discussion, this is a *I'm right and your wrong* thread.
It doesn't seem to matter how I personally feel about my images and the reasoning as to why I have do not edit.
I'm just *wrong* either way.


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

so let the thread rest in peace then


----------



## Mitica100 (May 12, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> If your sexual intercourse with your girlfriend is not perfect, and someone gives you a hint on how to improve it, then you would well listen and try it out, but you would not want that person to do it for you ....


 
   

Right on!


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

Ah but my lover might enjoy the demonstration... These days I assure you she would benefit from it. As would some images.

I have a high post count it is true.. I could be easily be mistaken for someone who knows what the hell they are doing. Which is why I also make it very clear in my critiques, or even edits, that this is probably not the mainstream opinons. Also that you should try this out yourself. 

Anyone who has been around the business has an obligation to say, "This is only how I see it." Not "This is right and you are wrong."

High Post count or over thirty years in a totally different kind of photography does not make me right. It probably makes me wrong.

Photography has changed so much in the techniques I would not even try to make a statement about how you do a thing, just that a thing should be done. That has not changed. A dark photograph is still a dark photograph even if I don't know all the ways to correct it.

By the by banana haters are going to march in LA, if they can find enough flack jackets.

About the once it is edited they can claim it... If someone is out to edit then steal your image you better not post it at all. Cause those are the ones who aren't going to care if you have do not edit or edit they will just steal it anyway.  Which is a benefit of making crappy images no one wants to steal my stuff.


----------



## Alpha (May 12, 2007)

Allowing other people to edit my photos interferes with my creative process. The final product is mine and mine alone.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

lol okay max.... (uninterpretable mumbles heard in the background)

Note to self remind max that even with editing the FINAL image is always the authors. It's only a suggestion by others when they edit.

In practicality very few times will people bother to edit.


----------



## gmarquez (May 12, 2007)

mysteryscribe said:


> I can only say why bother to post them then.



Myself, I post to the critique forum to get pointers and suggestions.

I post to the galleries to say "look at me, look at me".


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

MaxBloom said:


> is mine and mine alone.



... my preciousssss!

(no offense  )


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

gmarquez said:


> Myself, I post to the critique forum to get pointers and suggestions.



I post in both to get suggestions .. and to get feedback telling me how horrible my images are 

of course "look at me look at me!" is always part of it as well


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

I hide mine in the backwater of the alternate forum so I dont have to get comments but can say I post here.


----------



## TheOtherBob (May 12, 2007)

I'm actually with Max.  I think mine is set to "Ok to edit" (but I don't post pics, so I don't remember which I picked when I signed up).  But I can understand someone wanting to maintain control over their image.  

Some people see their photographs as a technical thing, and want advice and criticism on how to get that technical thing closer to some technical version of "perfect."  But others see this as an art form, and just want to show off their vision.  If someone edits that vision, the picture might be better - but it's no longer the artist's picture.  Some people don't care (me among them) - others do.

Think of other media.  You might write a play, and put it on, and ask "what do you think?"  That invites opinions - but you might well be insulted to have someone come back with "I think it was bad, but, here, I re-wrote that last scene - it's much better now."  It might be better - but it's not the playwright's work, or the playwright's vision.  

For some people, that's insulting on a far deeper level than technical advice.  It says that the person re-doing the work doesn't respect or appreciate the vision of the person who did it in the first place - that the original artistic vision was junk to be replaced by someone better's.  Maybe it was - but such things are debatable, and some people would rather pursue their own vision than invite others to "improve" it.  Even if the original artist doesn't take those "improvements," it's still insulting for some people.

The flip side is that to reach that vision, you need the tools - and someone who re-works the photo may be able to help a person learn those tools.  But there's a fine line between fixing and taking over a picture - if some people don't want to risk having their artwork treated like that, I can understand and respect that.

For me, I've never shot anything that I'd call art - so I'm just looking for people to tell me how to get the exposure right.


----------



## Thouchy (May 12, 2007)

EBphotography said:


> Just thought I would add a little tid bit, I believe it was ClarinetJWD that said in a similar thread that once someone has edited your photo, they can legally claim it as their own work.  That would be one concern of many and one reason I am thinking of going to Not Ok to Edit.



I was going to say something like this. 

Some people may not want you to edit because it is their business and they don't want there work floating and around being altered.  

Or they may like their style of altering and although they know that other things can be done to make it look better in others eyes, this is their style and how they do things. 

They may not want any critique and may just want to display a few pieces for the pleasure of our viewing.

Although some may think they are "too good or better" for it because you can't rule out everything and I am sure there are a few, I am sure that is not the reason in most cases. That is just not what they came here for or asked for.

Like it was stated, you should be free to make your own personal choices. However I may suggest putting a really good watermark on your photo, because no matter what people will do what they want to do....

:hug::  Now lets all get along.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

everytime you post pictures in a public place if you want to guarentee the image stay yours you need to do something. Honest people wont steal a good image from you no matter your editing options, and dishonest people will not matter your edit options... You have to protect your image.

My thinking goes back to this.  Since I write a little, if someone gave me a new ending I would read it see if there was anyting i could use then i would probably trash it.  But I wouldn't be upset that he took the time to write one.  


I certainly wouldn't be offended unless he put the play on with his ending and didn't pay me for it.  But that is a protection of copyright.  Id just have to sue his butt.  I have posted stories on line and had people contact me about using then on another site.  I always agree.  I have no idea how many others have just taken them since they are easy to steal.  I dont even care.  I consider it flattering even if they pass them off as theirs.

I really don't care if people dont want their images edited, I just pass over them and don't even look.  Too many people do want to learn to be upset with those who don't.  I think they are wrong, but that's my opinion and nothing more.  Since we have all stated our reasons not a lot more to be said.  

Except.  viva la revolution.... Bananas rule...


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

Thouchy said:


> :hug::  Now lets all get along.



I think we do anyway  .. most of us


----------



## ChigleyWigley (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> Actually, mine are fine to edit. What I think of people who choose "NOT OK":
> 
> 1. They are arrogant, or ignorant.
> 
> ...


Cedew is a classic Troll.  He claims he's looking for open, honest debate, yet posts a rant that basically insults anyone who doesn't agree with his views.  And then, when people actually start putting forward their opinions and views, he runs away, claiming the thread has run it's course.  Classic.

I'm new here and I haven't yet posted anything, but really, if someone doesn't want their work edited or messed around with, just respect that.  It isn't hard.


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

mysteryscribe said:


> Honest people wont steal a *good *image from you no matter your editing options, and dishonest people will not matter your edit options... You have to protect your image.



And stupid people will steal your *bad *images. Experienced that myself, but again, it was females depicted on them, so it was not about photographic quality anyway ...

Some might disagree, but I found out, this stupid little copyright symbol I have in my images these days when posting here, keeps at least the ignorant people from stealing. some steal because they have no idea about intellectual property .. 

.. however you cannot stop thieves from stealing, who do it on prupose (ok, you can post the images so small or watermarked, that they are unusable, but that does not really look nice  )


----------



## LaFoto (May 12, 2007)

Welcome to ThePhotoForum, ChigleyWigley, and what a thread you have chosen to start out with on here .
Curious to see some of your work!


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

ChigleyWigley said:


> Cedew is a classic Troll.  He claims he's looking for open, honest debate, yet posts a rant that basically insults anyone who doesn't agree with his views.  And then, when people actually start putting forward their opinions and views, he runs away, claiming the thread has run it's course.  Classic.
> 
> I'm new here and I haven't yet posted anything, but really, if someone doesn't want their work edited or messed around with, just respect that.  It isn't hard.



wow, you make this your first post  welcome to the forum anyway. be careful though, the forum is infested by bananas!

anyway, why not make your second post in the welcomes&intro section


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

Or maybe become a second banana instead of a second poster child...  nothing personal intended just a banana joke gone astray.


----------



## lostprophet (May 12, 2007)

The reason I choose to have "My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit" is because the voices told me to choose that option


----------



## ChigleyWigley (May 12, 2007)

LaFoto said:


> Welcome to ThePhotoForum, ChigleyWigley, and what a thread you have chosen to start out with on here .
> Curious to see some of your work!


Thanks!   You're right, it is a strange jumping in point .. I've been lurking and getting to know the place for a couple of weeks or so, and this thread just pushed my buttons a little


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

ChigleyWigley said:


> Thanks!   You're right, it is a strange jumping in point .. I've been lurking and getting to know the place for a couple of weeks or so, and this thread just pushed my buttons a little



so there is at least some good result of this thread ... that you become an active poster


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

I know this is in poor taste but let me move back to what was said here.

Let me see if I can summerize this.  
we have three different opinions here.

1. Butcher everything you see.
2. My images are my family leave them alone or ima gonna hurt yas.
3. Who gives a crap just tell me you love it or don't comment at all.

Okay I think I understand now.  There is no common ground so this accomplished only one thing.

That banana is a six letter word with far too many uses to be ignored any longer.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 12, 2007)

cedew said:


> Actually, mine are fine to edit. What I think of people who choose "NOT OK":
> 
> 1. They are arrogant, or ignorant.


_Everyone_ (with the possible exception of myself) is arrogant and ignorant.



cedew said:


> 2. They think they are better than you, therefore you are incapable of producing an image better than their original.


They are more likely concerned that the image produced will be _worse_ than the original because owning Photoshop does not mean you are any good with it and it certainly doesn't mean you know anything about photography.



cedew said:


> 3. They are old, or unwilling to learn.


As opposed to young and knowing it all?



cedew said:


> 4. They don't realize the insignificance of other people's opinion on the internet.


Or perhaps they do realise the insignificance of other people's opinions on the Internet. And as editing someone else's picture is just a way of expressing an opinion...



cedew said:


> 5. They hate photoshop.


Or they just don't think that PS is the answer to everything.



cedew said:


> In any case, their existence online is hypocritical, get with the times.


Or perhaps they find it amusing to see people who are trying to be clever contradicting themselves. If other people's opinions are insignificant... :lmao:


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

*WAY TO GO HERTZ WISH I HAD THOUGHT OF THAT,,*


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 12, 2007)

mysteryscribe said:


> *WAY TO GO HERTZ WISH I HAD THOUGHT OF THAT,,*



:mrgreen:


----------



## elsaspet (May 12, 2007)

All my images are copyrighted but they keep ending up over in the UK. LOL. Not a darn thing I can do about it either.  I know it's you Hertz! LOL


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 12, 2007)

elsaspet said:


> All my images are copyrighted but they keep ending up over in the UK. LOL.  Not a darn thing I can do about it either.



But you have the consolation of knowing that you make me go weak at the knees :heart:


----------



## elsaspet (May 12, 2007)

Hehe!  I'm so glad you're my Photo God.  But tell your Brits to quit stealing my crap.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 12, 2007)

elsaspet said:


> Hehe!  I'm so glad you're my Photo God.  But tell your Brits to quit stealing my crap.



I have, but they say our native crap isn't a patch on the imported stuff.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

All this love on this forum I must be on a different forum, or in an alternate universe


----------



## elsaspet (May 12, 2007)

Hertz van Rental said:


> I have, but they say our native crap isn't a patch on the imported stuff.


 
:scratch:
I don't speak English.... what's a "patch"?


----------



## gmarquez (May 12, 2007)

elsaspet said:


> :scratch:
> I don't speak English.... what's a "patch"?



Does babelfish.altavista.com  have English -> American translations?


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 12, 2007)

gmarquez said:


> Does babelfish.altavista.com  have English -> American translations?



Sure thing.

English: tomato = American: tomato
English: potato  = American: potato
English: neither = American: nei... does any of this sound familiar? Only I'm getting a strange feeling of deja vu.


----------



## Alex_B (May 12, 2007)

Hertz van Rental said:


> Sure thing.
> 
> English: tomato = American: tomato
> English: potato  = American: potato
> English: neither = American: nei... does any of this sound familiar? Only I'm getting a strange feeling of deja vu.



to me it all sounds totally different!

What is American for banana then?


----------



## elsaspet (May 12, 2007)

Praise God!  I'm a root vegetable!


----------



## Don Simon (May 12, 2007)

elsaspet said:


> :scratch:
> I don't speak English.... what's a "patch"?


 
It's something distributed by software companies - you apply it to a program that worked perfectly and it makes it stop working. 


I'm in an exclusive group of enigmatic posters; I won't say whether my photos are OK to edit. If I post a photo, edit it... I may thank you... I may have you killed... I like to keep 'em guessing :twisted:


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 12, 2007)

Okay Cindy,  On the subject of bananas .... oh hell never mind I don't really want to know.... It's probaby for the complexion anyway.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 13, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> What is American for banana then?



Penis?


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 13, 2007)

elsaspet said:


> Praise God!  I'm a root vegetable!



My mind reels with so many naughty thoughts that I've had to put my banana in the 'fridge to cool it down :raisedbrow:


----------



## Alex_B (May 13, 2007)

Hertz van Rental said:


> My mind reels with so many naughty thoughts that I've had to put my banana in the 'fridge to cool it down :raisedbrow:



Don't slam the door now! Don't slam the door!

:lmao:


----------



## Ribber (May 13, 2007)

No flaming intended... just looking for some humor in all of this...

I can imagine people "offended" by 'NOTE' downloading loads of 'NOTE' photos and tweaking them in Photoshop, laughing maniacally with each change.

"MUAHAHA! How about a little UNSHARPEN MASK for ya!!"

"I got your SELECTIVE COLORING right here! BOOYAA!"

... sliding the levels back and forth...

... airbrushing eyeglasses and mustaches...


----------



## Alex_B (May 13, 2007)

Ribber said:


> No flaming intended...



Don't worry, this thread is well past its flaming phase 



> just looking for some humor in all of this...




and you found it :lmao:


----------



## gizmo2071 (May 13, 2007)

:lmao:


----------



## Hertz van Rental (May 13, 2007)

Ouch! Flamed banana...


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 13, 2007)

fried green bananas or a study in canibalism... by c gurkin available now in hardcover edition only.


----------



## bnkrecords (May 13, 2007)

as I am new to this, i know there are certain things people do and do not like. I dont mind people editing my photos, but where my first love is (music), I cant stand it when people try to edit my music, or make a remix that does not fit the song. if they know what they are doing and do it as a suggestion, i have no problem. if that makes any sense.


----------



## shorty6049 (May 13, 2007)

i guess my feeling on this, is that, if people want to edit your photos , they will whether you say its ok or not.... its going to stop them from reposting it, but not from editing it... I dont care if people edit my photos, because as long as i have the original file, i dont feel like it matters all that much what they do with the version i posted here, becasue in the end, i still have my photo and someone elses' edit doesnt effect me in any way.


----------



## Battou (May 14, 2007)

I have marked that my photos are not ok to edit, My reasoning for this is the fact that nine out of ten pics I take have a spefic purpose to me, as well as an "in the event I put any here" bit (I have one online gallery and that is enough for now).

I am an auto body technition and I take a lot of automotive pictures. It would have a negitive impact on my portfolio if there are a hand full of images in there that can be found edited else where. Even if the manip is well done a duplicate or image based on the image I am using would serve only to discredit my portfoilo. So I dissalow it for all my photography.

Truth be told my artistic expression stuff needs a lot of work to the point I don't think any one would touch it any who.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 14, 2007)

Why would anyone in their right mind come to this place to cop edited images. Why not just go to one of the thousands of websites and just lift them from the artist. 

Unless of course the edited image was actually better than the original.... Never happen...

besides nobody really wants to learn anyway we just pay lipservice to that concept ... Don't we?  We know it all already why bother.

I must warn you though, someone helped you to be where you are, no matter where that is, Karma has a way of coming around.


----------



## hovis (May 14, 2007)

Thought about this - I don't really mind others editing my photos.  Trouble is, there isn't a "My photos are only OK to edit if you tell me why you did what you did, why you consider it better, and exactly HOW you did it" option....  so without all those points, simply editing one of my images doesn't teach me anything about techniques, or even about peoples tastes.  

Just a point of view


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 14, 2007)

hovis said:


> Thought about this - I don't really mind others editing my photos. Trouble is, there isn't a "My photos are only OK to edit if you tell me why you did what you did, why you consider it better, and exactly HOW you did it" option.... so without all those points, simply editing one of my images doesn't teach me anything about techniques, or even about peoples tastes.
> 
> Just a point of view


 
I would think if they took the time to edit it and you liked what or even part of it, I'd say that if you posted a request for clerification they would do it. If for no other reason than to show they did have a reason to do it.

You know I have heard that said, but so far I haven't personally experienced someone just sticking up an edited picture. I edited this post without a long drawnout explaination because it didn't need one.... http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=888541#post888541

I edited another where I gave a long explaination of leading lines.... can't fine it right now. Edited one with where I changed the color of print to (I thought) better mimick a oxidized copper or bronze statue and remove some flash glared. The person reedited by adding a loco, so much for my thinking, but that's okay.  He was exposed to a different set of ideas and so was anyone esle who looked at it.

I do a lot of composition editing when people ask, because I tend to compose more classic and most of the people here compose modern funky. Sometimes it's good to see what your funky shot looks like classical. You can reject it of course.  Most folks likely do. 

What exactly did it hurt to see it. If your shot is better than someone else's edit, trust me everyone will know it. If not YOU get to decide whether you want to change the way you shoot in the future. See it isn't about that shot it's about knowing there is another way.

Soapbox closed for the afternoon.


----------



## skieur (May 15, 2007)

cedew said:


> Actually, mine are fine to edit. What I think of people who choose "NOT OK":
> 
> 3. They are old, or unwilling to learn.
> 
> ...


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 16, 2007)

Well in response to the above.... I don't know nothin' bout no damn photoshop and I only been in the business professionally since 1969... and mine have been okay to edit since day one.... Kinda goes against the thinking that started this thread.  

It's more about what's in your head and how you view your work and the craft in general, than it is about age and knowledge.  I don't know how I viewed the work at thirty cause nobody asked me about it then.  There was no decission to make.  People voted with thier check book and critique just wasn't availble except by maybe one friend. So this is all new to me.  I suppose someone just starting would take this for granted though.


----------



## dewey (May 16, 2007)

Get off my lawn...


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 16, 2007)

That wasn't me on your lawn it was a stray dog rofl


----------



## jack lumber (May 28, 2008)

Alex_B said:


> wow, you make this your first post  welcome to the forum anyway. be careful though, the forum is infested by bananas!
> 
> anyway, why not make your second post in the welcomes&intro section


 
 Bananas are evil. They are the spawn of the devil.
sorry. My images are ok to edit, because anything done to them will make them better:er:


----------



## Senor Hound (May 29, 2008)

What about people who are professionals and don't want to worry about people altering their photos and then claiming they had some sort of artistic involvement and deserve a portion of the sales?

And what about people who are uncomfortable with the thought of others messing with a photo's flow?  If I was a painter looking for advice, I wouldn't want my art teacher to come along and put brush strokes on my canvas, showing me what to do.  Some view a photograph as a work of art, one that speaks volumes emotionally.  To have someone else alter it is like undermining the whole process, cause that person doesn't truly understand the photo.  Someone photoshopped a picture I made once, but after they did, I didn't feel right claiming it was my photo, cause in truth, it no longer was.  So that's a reason also

There are many reasons to want your photos to stay yours.  Art is a very intimate, personal discovery of the human psyche (for some), and having others chime in once in a while sometimes leaves a bad taste in one's mouth.


----------

