-I don't usually like to jump in to the fray of any given runaway topic regarding photography but on this point, I feel it very important to clarify the differences between natural and enhanced images for those who appreciate wildlife photography, but may not be up to speed on these differences.
The first important distinction is that there are many "blemishes" for lack of a better word that can be imprinted on a digital image from both lens and camera, the only way to remove these is through post-editing, through several methods depending on which program you are using. This is absolutely not the same as "enhancing a digital image by adding layers, utilizing brush tools, etc.. The same is true of sharpening an image, think of it as putting your glasses on if you are near-sighted, all sharpening, or cropping does for you is clarify or pull-in closer?the natural object being photographed. This also as absolutely not the same as altering the subject matter of an image. I have yet to encounter a wildlife photography contest that does not allow sharpening, cropping or the removal of aberrations from photographs. The only disqualified images I have every heard of in any given contest were physically altered as previously mentioned. The other most
common error is the mis-size your image, there are always strict guidelines to that regard in any photo contest. In?practice, you?must have a sharp?image to?begin with in order?for cropping/ sharpening?to be very effective, thus the view that sharpening or cropping is somehow an unfair advantage couldn't be further from the truth, it is usually a basic requirement to produce an image most representative of your natural subject, similar to viewing it with 20/20 vision and at close-range.?Often, the removal of branches, or other clutter is allowed in any nature photography contest, however for me personally, that is where I draw the line and I believe that in removing any given object in a photo, you lose substantial sharpness/ clarity in that area of the photo in comparison to the rest of the photo, making the removal fairly obvious and?negating any benefit. Hopefully some find this useful.
?
-Darrel DeNune