_Digital Imaging and their Effects _
By: erika wein
The Process and Difference of Digital Imaging and Their Effects The
traditional photographic process that has defined image reproduction for over
150 years involves a long drawn out series of chemical reactions beginning
with the capture of light on silver film and ending with the fixing of the
image onto paper or a transparency through the development processing. The
final image is analog, which means it is composed of continuous gradients that
are analogous to the gradients seen in the world around usDigital imaging,
however, requires a completely different process. The image must be captured
electronically on a light sensitive silicon chip. Each silicon chip contains
thousands of pixels, which is "picture" plus "element", which measure light,
color, and contrast. Because each pixel is a square and uniform in dimension,
each individual one can be changes by means of a computer. The size of each
pixel is determined by the resolution, which is the number of pixels per
square inch. The key difference between an image on film and a digital image
is the resolution. For example, when you look at a painting, you see many
separate pixels that form the whole painting to form a conceptual process.
When thousands of pixels are formed together in a digital image, you form one
single image that leads you to view the photograph as a single view. In 1995
Kodachrome film had a resolution equivalent to 18 million pixels, the best
digital camera had a resolution less than one tenth of this. As this
capability continues to grow and improve, however, other means of digitizing
photographs have become the medium choice for altering images. If an image is
analog to begin with, it must me converted to a digital form, hence turning it
into a series of 0’s and 1’s that a computer can read. A scanning device does
this, before the image can be read on screen. When turning an analog image
into a digital image, it changes the process of development from chemical to
mathematical, because each pixel is represented my a number and stored in the
computers memory for easy reading. This process makes the image true and
impossible to tell how many duplicates of the image have been made. Once
information is in its digital form, it becomes very simple to save, alter, and
duplicate. Because each pixel can be enlarged and changed on the computer
screen, each piece of the image can be altered at will. Elements can be added
or subtracted, changed in color, brightness, or contrast. Areas of the picture
can be copied and moved to other areas of the image where other things have
been removed, and this can be repeated indefinitely. People can be made fatter
or thinner, the color of hair and eyes can be changes, or completely removed
from a picture is so desired. When the image is finished, it can be printed or
sent via telephone lines or satellite anywhere in the world Traditional
photographs may be altered in four basic ways: in the set up of the model,
camera, and lighting before the photograph is taken; in the way the photograph
is taken; in the processing of the film; or by the addition or deletion of
elements to the processed photograph, followed by retouching the whole image.
Portrait photographers are especially adept at setting up the scene and
subject so that it will appear in the most flattering light. Light sources
such as from a fire; candle, neon tubes, or incandescent bulbs can
dramatically alter the way we interpret personalities. Shadows can be filled
in or deepened. Angles are carefully chosen, and subjects are positioned so
the camera only sees their good side. Subjects can be places in front of any
backdrop to convince the viewer of the subjects where about. It has been
believed that historical photographs that have been found have been staged
because the set up or subjects suggest image manipulation One famous example
is photographs of the Civil War taken in 1863 by Alexander Gardner, where the
same dead soldier in rebel uniform is seen behind a wall of piled stones
nearly enclosed by a big rock foundations, his musket is still standing, and
then again as a Northern soldier in a field, with a gun lying beside his head.
Clearly the same corpse has been used twice for an aesthetic and editorial
effect After the set-up is done, various other schemes can be used to
further manipulate the image. In addition to warm diffused light or strident
lighting, the camera lens can romanticize the subject through soft focus or
"harden" the subject through sharp focus. Different focal lenses can bring the
background into clarity. With a wide-angle lens, the field takes on equal
importance to the subject or even comments on the foreground figure. They can
flatten or blur the background into insignificance with a telephoto lens that
has very shallow depth of field, which directly puts all the emphasis on the
subject. Full color can make an image seem happy and festive compared to an
image in black and white that would be depressing. Angle and distance have
powerful connotations for emotional involvement and attitude towards the
subject. The composition and what is included in the picture and what is left
out can also deeply alter a person’s perception of the whole image. Before any
photograph is taken, therefore, a number of decisions have already affected
the outcome of the final photograph This is why it is said so often that
there is no such thing as an objective photograph. The photographer already
builds the attitude and tone and mood into the photograph. The only
photography that avoids these rules are passport photography and photography
done by police because of a crime. In these two instances, things are seen
just as they are and minimize the photographer’s discretion and ensure
uniformity. In the processing and post-processing stages, a variety of
techniques can be used to alter the print, including over or underexposure or
treating the negative to cover lines or remove unwanted objects or people from
the image. If arts are masked off or cut out of the photograph, the natural
gradients of the photograph are disturbed and an unnatural sharp edge appears
in the final image. Because when the film is developed, the clumping of
molecules forms an emulsion grain, if this grain is subsequently disturbed by
pen, pencil, or paint, or a specific section is erased the alteration is
easily detectable. If parts are added to a photograph after it is developed,
they must match exactly before the composite can be convincingly
rephotographed. Because any difference in proportion, color, brightness,
focus, contrast, lighting, or camera angle is an immediate perceptual signal.
Any additions must be photographed under nearly exact conditions as the
primary photograph and reflect the exact position from which it would have
naturally occurred Even when altered photographs are rephotographed,
alterations such as retouching and montages never disappear entirely because
traditionally photography is an analog representation and therefore difficult
to alter without obvious effect. Unlike a digital image, which is broken down
into small separate units, the traditionally processed photograph appears as a
continuous unbroken sequence of subtle gradients. This makes it extremely
difficult to rework a photograph because there are no individual units or
cells in a grid, from which to work with after the image is fixed. There are
only ever increasingly and subtle gradations that are nearly impossible to
retouch convincingly. The final image’s surface is so smooth and clear that
retouching would be very obvious To "fake" a photograph it is necessary to
have mastered all of the skills in doing so. Otherwise, it will be even easier
to detect the falsehood of the photograph. A photograph that has been faked
must have all the aspects of a real photograph to be believed as real, every
shadow and highlight, and the notion that the photograph is a realistic
possibility. Many experts may often disagree on a photograph’s authenticity,
but many have to go through a lot of research and many looks to determine if
an image is untrue. The first thing someone may question when inquiring about
a possible fake is why was the image taken. When it comes to photo "fakery",
money is usually the key element in the answer to this question. After the
initial questioning, a number of different experts are used; including: photo
interpreters, subjective experts, photogrammetrists, chemical analysts, paper
analysts, and technologists. But even the most intense studies can not always
detect a bogus photograph. Some pictures have not been labeled as real or fake
for many years The famous Hemingway quotes "a picture is worth a thousand
words", is exactly what artistic photographers may try and capture in their
images. It is the story below the surface of the photograph that they trying
to express. They seek to record the critical moment that implies a larger
reality. But then on the other hand you have tabloid photographers and people
putting images on the internet, that decide on their own behalf to change the
view of the photograph and its meaning to those who see it It is exactly
these situations and the issues of copyright that hurt the photography
profession and integrity. The use of computers has benefited mankind a great
deal, but it is its misuse that is harming the professionalism. These issues
are hosts a whole new lot of legal questions. How many changes can be made
without altering the original integrity of the photo? When a photo is made
from several different photographs to whom is the copyright owned? And when
several people have access to the original photograph, it makes it even more
difficult to claim the rights of ownership. Besides of the protection of the
photographer, the subjects I the image are neglected as well. Each person has
become vulnerable to the fact that if their picture is taken they run the risk
of being misrepresented somewhere down the line, may it be from the
photographer or by someone else who has access to the image. It is for this
reason why photographers now must be so specific with model releases and the
written words in the model release, so in the long run the photographer is not
responsible for the misuse of the image. For example if the image is placed on
the internet as part of a news story or a portfolio piece, any person may be
able to copy that right from their computer screen and do whatever they please
with it. It is that difficult to protect the images of professional
photographers and their property It is in my opinion that image manipulation
can be as much destructive as it its beneficial. As each image is produced, it
is one more image in the world that can be changed for the better or for the
worse. I believe that it is the photographer’s discretion, with the permission
of each of their subjects, to manipulate in an agreeable manner to all those
involved. Any other uses of a photograph by anyone else but the original owner
should be used only with permission to do so and when the owner knows what the
exact use will be. Photography is an amazing tool that has so many uses and
purposes it is uncountable. It is a shame that as technology progresses, as it
will continue to do for the rest of time, that it can be used in a harmful and
deceitful way. Surprisingly, photo manipulation has been around since the
beginning of photography itself. We now live in a world where photography
doesn’t stop at the photograph, it is now a phenomenon known as digital
imagery and it will be with us for the rest of time, and only getting better
and harder to detect as time goes on. The speed of improvement on this
technology is moving so fast that few can get a hold on it, including the
lawmakers to protect the photographers and their subjects. Hopefully for the
sake of the humanity, it will gain control and turn us all into believers of
the images we see rather than doubters and skeptics.
_Bibliography _
Bibiliography 1. Brugioni, Dino A. Photo Fakery. Copyright 1999, Library of
Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data. 2. Gross, Larry; Katz, John Stewart;
Ruby Jay. Image Ethics. Copyright 1988, Oxford University Press. 3. Seward
Barry, Ann Marie. Visual Intelligence. Copyright 1998, State University of New
York Press, Albany. 4. World Wide Web. www.jupiter.com www.photonews.com
Bibiliography 1. Brugioni, Dino A. Photo Fakery. Copyright 1999, Library of
Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data. 2. Gross, Larry; Katz, John Stewart;
Ruby Jay. Image Ethics. Copyright 1988, Oxford University Press. 3. Seward
Barry, Ann Marie. Visual Intelligence. Copyright 1998, State University of New
York Press, Albany. 4. World Wide Web. www.jupiter.com www.photonews.com
Bibiliography 1. Brugioni, Dino A. Photo Fakery. Copyright 1999, Library of
Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data. 2. Gross, Larry; Katz, John Stewart;
Ruby Jay. Image Ethics. Copyright 1988, Oxford University Press. 3. Seward
Barry, Ann Marie. Visual Intelligence. Copyright 1998, State University of New
York Press, Albany. 4. World Wide Web. www.jupiter.com www.photonews.com
Word Count: 2034
| 
