Should Color Enhanced photos be used s plant images?

Las Cruces, NM

With modern Photoshop tools, it is possible to significantly brighten colors and to sharpen contrasts. When is such an image a representation of a flower and when is it a caricature? Would you feel cheated if a catalog used color enhanced images and your garden results were significantly more bland? Of course, there is natural variation due to soil, climate, etc. Should Dave's garden have an image policy: no color enhanced images? identify such images as color enhanced? ignore the issue? Or, Do we believe that it is not a problem here? As examples, look at the variety of colors, and contrasts (especially halos and beards) for images of most Award-winning Iris (green stars). One tip off is that the foliage is also more vivid.
Brown Lasso Images: 1. From my garden, 2-4. Variety of images from Dave's Garden, 5. My photo, I color enhanced it with a free Photo editor (Photoshop is $700)

Thumbnail by FWES Thumbnail by FWES Thumbnail by FWES Thumbnail by FWES Thumbnail by FWES
Scott County, KY(Zone 5b)

I'm pretty sure that there is no policy, since this is a free site.

Why would you - in particular - care?

Murfreesboro, TN(Zone 7a)

If the image is enhanced to correct it closer to its true color or to crop and sharpen the image, we don't care. If the photo is doctored to show an unnatural color (a gentian-blue daylily or rose, for example), then we would take issue with it, and reject it.

Post a Reply to this Thread

Please or register to post.

Upload Images to your reply

    You may upload up to 5 images