I am a member of a photographic club and it is suprising me that some of the images that I would class as art (even the image I posted for critiquing I would class as an art piece not true photography) are being put forward into competitions. Other strange events happen, like in B&W contests they allow B&W + 1 colour?? But to my main question, how much manipulation of an image is allowed before it stops being a photo and becomes a piece of art?

That is a good question Sabretalon, IMHO an image stops being an image when you start adding in 3d things, dolls etc. (you know non photographic items) I do colorize black and white images or certain things in them, and I don't consider the image any less of an image because I have done that (sometimes it is what the customer asked for), but then again I am not adding a layer or anything so maybe that is why I think of it that way. (I just use a lhaso) If I had to layer the image in anyway, and add tubes to it or anything like that then I wouldn't consider it an image any longer. To me photography is just how the camera sees it, no postwork no nothing. But I guess a lot of people have to postwork images to get them how they want them! I personally would sooner trash a photo then postwork it much. Figuring I could always reshoot it the way I wanted. But hey that is me, about the most you will see me do is maybe straighten a horizon or add signature and frame to it. OK shut up Brenda, you are rambling... LOL! I hope I didn't confuse you too much. Brenda :)

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=554099

Check out:

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=936909

...and the ever popular: Not to at all belittle the question. Particularly the strange rules that Contests come up with are always amusing. But, in the end, just arbitrary rules. Here, we tend towards "pure" photography, and put heavy manipulations in "2D" or "Mixed Media." But the rules are not fixed. The whole point of it is to have fun!

This is an old Chestnut and I tend to first and foremost to keep away from Camera Clubs as it has been my experience to find them full of wise people who would not recognise a decent picture if it fell of a Gallery wall on thier head!!!... They protest "Oh but you used Photoshop to do this" ... and yet are perfectly happy to manipulate things in the Darkroom. And dont like the fact we dont need to mess around with chemicals anymore.. And that we can actually take a decent image with a Digital Camera!! As far as it goes I am a Purist at heart and think if it is possible in camera fair enough.. Also the use of filters etc is fine if it removes imperfections or enhances an image in a natural way... If you want to do more artlike images post in Mixed Medium.. Photography IMHO is an Art and dont see a clear distinction? Are you saying if its a Photograph it is not artistic?

.....to Nilla --- Ansel Adams did lots of postwork to his photos -- the end result of all that dodging - burning etc might bear little relation to what the camera originally saw ....yet everyone would call his end product photography --- so - it's pretty tricky to define when that line might be crossed -- today with digital everything is cross polinated so much it becomes rather difficult to label something so that the viewer understands the process.

.....I think photography can be: straight reportage -- a refined craft -- or art -- or any combination of these.

Danob said, " ... keep away from Camera Clubs ..." I say, "Take what you can use and leave the rest." If the camera club helps you with image composition, avoiding "gremlins", exposure compensation for front/back light subjects, over/under exposure for low light level situations; tricks to increase color saturation like misting a rock; etc. ... Then take that advice. (Gremlins are unwanted things in the picture like trash or branches growing from a person's head.) If you want more (photoshop or other tools to enhance an image) ... get that where you can find it. MGD

As I've gotten deeper into the process I've become more of a purist, I think.... its always been my feeling that photos that look like paintings etc. really are not photographs to me (emphasis on the to me part) wouldn't want to offend anyone ..... However anything that can be done in a darkroom from solarizing to montaging, sepia toning, cyan toning, dodging, burning, sharpening, etc, etc, can also be done in photoshop ..... And unstrung's reminder that Ansel Adams was indeed a very big user of postwork albeit the old fashioned way, should be kept in mind. I don't know too many people, even professionals, that can take an image straight out of the camera and have it look fabulous.... especially after being digitized. Simply scanning an image from a negative, softens it, often throws off colors and contrast... They need to be postworked to bring them back to the way they looked in the original print. I sometimes find it humorous the way people will proclaim no postwork was done as if doing postwork were a bad thing. 8~P ..... or maybe they're just proud of their skills.... shrug Again no offense meant to anyone.... simply my opinion...

....WELL SAID MICHELE A. !!!

I have no actual problem with my camera club 95% of them are digital and because I teach Photoshop I am running sessions there for them as well. I was only pointing out, what I saw happening more and more. People taking a photo at "reconstruction days" i.e. romans or world war 2 soldiers etc.. then taking pictures of some scenery or some roman architecture then combining. When done correctly it can be effective but I did say when. I was just wondering about the question because I wanted to enter a few outside club contests. None of the rules actually say where the cut of point is for manipulation. How do you prove an image you created started off life as a photo?

Oh I agree it certainly can be effective and is great fun as well.. As to the question of proof it is down to the honesty of the submitter I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT? These days with such powerful programmes such as Photoshop it is getting impossible to be able to tell.. Recent improvements in Version 8 also seem able to correct even poorly taken Photographs correcting many mistakes So perhaps it is not even possible to know if even great looking shots started out that way.... For me its the extra things like Composition etc that sets them apart from the mundane.. Forgive my Bias regarding Camera Clubs I am sure they are great placs to be these days.. My own experiences were not very positive a few years ago.. I would think they would need to draw up some clear rules for entry to competitions..