Forum home Talkback
This Forum will close on Wednesday 27 March, 2024. Please refer to the announcement on the Discussions page for further detail.

Have the photos been superimposed?

TootlesTootles Posts: 1,469

hello - just getting comfy with a cuppa and this months GW mag. 

i only clicked on a couple of years ago that the plant and seed mags alter their photos to make us yearn for beautiful flower filled plants that actually would never ever look like the photos (even with Monty's magic touch!).

i'm a bit gutted to see some of the same thing going on in the GW mag - or is it just my eyes?? I'm on page 13 and those violas don't look normal. 

If this is the case it's pretty disappointing. I want to see real plants. Please tell me that the images aren't touched up?  It feels a little bit like being fibbed to! 

Humph. 

«1

Posts

  • The RHS mag The  garden,  is selling Violas. There is a picture in there of the three colours. They look like large violets with taller stems. Do hope they look like that when they arrive, otherwise I shall be sorry I ordered them.

  • image

     

  • Most published photos are 'tweaked' to enhance them, improve clarity etc - have a look at the Camera Corner thread and see some of the tweaks on there.  David K will be able to explain how more clearly than I can.  I did my photographic training in the days of dark rooms and developer. 

    People used to think that photographs had veracity as opposed to paintings ... but there is no 'truth' ... photographs are created images just like paintings. 

    However, there are sometimes photos that are 'over tweaked' and looking at the photo on page 13 it does look to me as if the blues have been 'turned up' a fraction too much. 


    Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.





  • B3B3 Posts: 27,472

    Surely plant catalogues  have the same constraints on descriptive licence as other advertisers. The sale of goods act should cover it. Unfortunately the sellers have the growing conditions get out I suppose.

    In London. Keen but lazy.
  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 34,888

    I'd have thought Trade Descriptions Act 1968

    Devon.
  • TootlesTootles Posts: 1,469

    I can understand why people selling things do it (not that I agree with it) but I'm a bit confused as to why images in an article about plants would be altered so much. Using this example, I don't think it's just the colour that has been 'tweaked', they look practically stuck on. 

    I'd rather see a true image, of course taken by a professional, but with warts and all! 

  • But what is a 'true image'?  Thinking back - do you remember how the colours from Kodak film differed from those produced by an Ilford film - one was much yellower - think it was the Kodak. 

    The pink of a rose will look very different in different kinds of light ....... on a grey day it will look bluer and on a sunny day it'll have a warmer hue. 


    Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.





  • B3B3 Posts: 27,472

    It's the same in the fashion industry - models with shapes unachievable for mere mortals.

    I suspect magazine photographers and garden programme directors are non-gardeners and can't believe that natural plants are good enough. Hence the background music you often get in nature and gardening programmes which no more enhances a programme than canned laughter makes a comedy funnier.

    In London. Keen but lazy.
Sign In or Register to comment.