Digitally manipulated Large Format Picture

[Greenspeed]

Just wondering whether anyone here does manipulation of their digitally scanned large format files.

For example, I have replaced boring skies with one taken with a digital camera. Not sure whether this board is tolerant of hybrid pictures.

Thanks

[Lenny Eiger]

I think you will find it fairly tolerant here. People do all sorts of things....

Lenny

[Peter De Smidt]

That sort of thing, replacing skies in photographic prints, has been going on for well over 100 years. For more extreme manipulations, consider the work of Jerry Uelsmann.

[Kirk Gittings]

Carlton Watkins.

[Greenspeed]

Thanks all.



Here's an example I did with replacing the sky. The base pic was captured on 8 x 10 (Fuji Velvia). The sky was digitally captured with a Sony DSLR.

[Brian Ellis]

Carlton Watkins.

And hundreds of other 19th century landscape photographers.

[rich815]

As long as you're upfront and explicit about the process and not try to pass it off as a single exposure I see no issues. Nice montage.

[uphereinmytree]

I don't really see the point in manipulating large format scans for a 'better image' beyond tonal control, sharpening etc.. I rarely see images where extreme manipulations are not detectable which devalues my viewing experience (IMO). I have done manipulations such as removing a sign or a piece of garbage that becomes distracting. Something I should have noticed at the time of capture. I do think that for creative artistic purpose it's absolutely valid, but should be made known to a potential buyer or collector.

[Lenny Eiger]

Greenspeed,
You didn't ask for feedback but you did post the image. I personally don't see that you improved the image with this sky vs any other. You have a very beautiful foreground with delicious smooth tones. I think the issue with the image is more one of working out the design. I generally try to crop in the camera as much as possible but to adjust this image I would probably take most of the sky out altogether. In fact, I might just cut the image in half.

I can clearly see a halo along the mountains which makes me thinks it was digitally manipulated and it seems to take away from what you originally saw. On one hand, you are looking at these delicious tones in nature, on the other you are looking at impressive lightning bolts. These are two different images that you are trying to press into one. I find it is better to try and tell one story at a time.

I applaud you for trying different and new things, I see no problem in mixing scanned and digitally captured. However, I think the seeing is the most important thing. I think you have to look at why you took the image in the first place and focus on that. Design is a very important part of shooting landscape and most of the time I feel is has to be overdone to work properly.

I don't mean to give you a hard time. I hope this is helpful.

Lenny

[tenderobject]

I know this would be stupid question to some here but would there be any advantage of shooting 8x10, scanned film and manipulate in computer software than just shooting it on a Hi-End digital camera? Maybe i'm just a purist or clueless. I shoot film to get what film can do. I do post processing as minimal as i can though not adding/subtracting any elements. Thati haven't done yet but if i do i would call it as graphic arts not photos but i know thats another story. Anyway, i haven't embraced that kind of process that is why i want to know.