Edit a Landscape in 5 Easy Steps

4 Comments

1. 

   oliver schultzApril 16, 2024

   I really dig all of Dylan´s tutorials!
   He is fabulous, on the practical level, in terms of ON1 knowledge, but also in terms of image aesthetics! A real valuable and rare blend!

   Then, seeing this, and thinking of ON1: it is a great tool!
   I wish, though, that there would be some weaving in of image ethics, as it is all about photography, and that come with responsibilities.
   While, e.g., I love the ease with which skies can be swapped as if the user is a demiurg or terraformer en miniature, I think there should be an ethics badge attached to this. All this is where one leaves the field of – some kind – of truthful representation of an encountered scene (‘photography’), and enters the field of freeform image fabrication (with all its load of ‘outright’ manipulation).
   This should at least be flagged, thematized somehow in the context of ‘photography tools’, IMHO.

   Sign in to reply

2. 

   oliver schultzApril 25, 2024

   no ethics thoughts / discourse in here at all? neither company nor community.
   – hmmm…. 🤔

   Sign in to reply

   1. 

      Tracy SlocumApril 28, 2024

      This is the first time I’m see this tutorial. I think people have their own set of ethics they follow. Not sure it’s up to ON1 to point this out. I mean, it’s so obviously a manipulation tool in many ways. People know this, I believe. Same for any photo editor. For me, I’ve not done many sky swaps simply because most of my photography best pieces go to stock photo websites or contests. But I won’t hesitate to swap out a poor sky on a less liked photo with a great sky photo I’ve taken to print out for my own home or for a friend or relative. AND I tell them it’s swapped. Usually I get, “oh that’s cool you can do that”. I only use those I’ve taken, however. I stop at “buying” skies to use in my photos.

      I don’t think I’m better than anyone who uses bought skies. I just like to use my own. Same with backgrounds and textures. It’s just how I work. Simple as that.

      Sign in to reply

      1. 

         oliver schultzMay 1, 2024

         fair enough, Tracy. that is at least a stance, and I can in some way relate & respect that. of course. no one is better than anyone else per se.

         I still feel there is more responsibility when providing software. esp. when it is to a mass market. and especially when it is to a photography market – which is a genre pretty much based on an ethics of representation. and even more in these days of easy and universal manipulation.
         so, making it deliberately easy to change scenes – and, btw., faces too –, I feel, should be earmarked with some notes. and giving visibility to inherent pitfalls, responsibilities etc.
         – we have seen how ‘copyright’ got incorporated in almost every aspect of photography software TOS, package leaflets, etc. so, why should reponsible use of tools to drastically alternate representations of people and scenes not be thematized, or something where a company takes a stance? esp. if it deliberately builds ways to most easily change (manipulate) representation into its software.

         still, I respect your personal stance. I think, though, where it comes to providing tools for large-scale use, there should be another level of adopting a stance & responsibility, coming along with that.

         also, I think a community subscribed to the culture of photography should at least reflect and discuss such matters. that´s different than projecting oneself as being better than another one.

         thx for your response, in any way. appreciated.

Please review our privacy policy for information about how we use the data we collect.