Scene Swaps

Our studio specializes in on-location portraits for seniors, children and families.  The infinite variety and wonderful surprises that occur when capturing images in the real world cannot be duplicated nor imitated in any studio.  The challenges of weather, travel and light conditions can be obstacles, yet those often turn into opportunities for something extraordinary.  However, nowadays there is a temptation to forego real-life experiences in favor of the ease, repeatability and environmental comfort of a studio.  Using a computer, the photographer can digitally replace a plain background with a real life background. This technology can be used for great good to solve problems that previously were insurmountable.  On the other hand, this technology also has the potential to degrade our credibility and integrity to the public.

 

This technology I’m referring to is “Scene Swapping”, which means digitally cutting a subject from one image and placing the subject within another image, creating the illusion that the subject was in a totally different location.  Of course, that effect has long been done using background projection or other techniques.  The results from those methods have often been less than visually perfect or believable.  Today however, computers and specialized software allows the operator to cut out a subject from a background and paste them in an entirely different scene, with amazingly seamless visual perfection. 

 

As with many new technological breakthroughs, the benefits need to be considered as well as the potential problems to determine whether all that can be done, should be done.  Knowledge is not the same as wisdom.   

 

Some photographers say that the world is moving in that direction whether or not we ride along.  I disagree.  And even if it is, there are many fads and practices that we don’t have to participate in if they are contrary to our best interests, as well as detrimental to the integrity of our profession and product.

 

Whenever I bring up this subject, some photographers try to debate the issue on a shallow level by bringing up the fact that portraits themselves, and the lighting, posing and Photoshop tools we use to flatter our subjects, are already not telling the absolute truth about our clients.  That’s a ridiculous argument, and one I refuse to be diverted by.  I have no problem with photographers using any and all available tools during a session, or using all forms and degrees of retouching, Photoshop to slim or enhance figures and head swaps.  Those are tools that merely enhance an imagete.  Are they 100% literally true or accurate?  Of course not.  Our job as commissioned portraitists is not necessarily to show the hard, brutal truth.  It is to use everything at or disposal to better tell the story we want to tell, or what the client wants us to say about them.  But I draw the line where that story is a total fabrication (not just a “white lie”, like tucking a waist).  Some photographers may not see a difference between slimming a waist, or using a background... and placing them in a setting they never were.  That’s silly.  The difference is obvious and clear.  Placing one real person into a different real scene creates an illusion that goes beyond simply improvement, or flattery.  The sole reason for a location swap is to deceive viewers into believing the subject was actually at that place.  The goal is to make it as seamless and believable as possible.  The more real-looking the effect, the more successful the deception is! 

 

What about the commercial and entertainment world, where there are countless ways technology is used to sell products, isolate products from a distracting background, or place actors in a different scene, etc?  No problem!  The difference between those commercial applications and scene swaps in portraits is much the same as comparing a movie to a documentary.  One is assumed to be fantasy, while the other is assumed to be real.  People know that portraiture is somewhere between a movie and a documentary.  They know photographers can use all kinds of Photoshop techniques to improve how someone looks, but they should be able to trust the basic, core truth of the image.

 

If we ignore all other extraneous details (clothing, expression, props, story, etc.) in a portrait, we end up with a two dimensional recording of a person in a place.  Now, if that person wasn’t in that place, then the portrait is a lie!  (Ouch.)  That’s a strong word, but I feel strongly about this. 

 

Placing a subject into a different scene, forces either of the following situations to occur:

   1) Subjects will say they weren’t actually there, and that it was a photographer’s computer trick. 

  2) Subjects will lie to viewers by saying they were at that location. 

 

The first answer is the one that presents the most long term danger to our profession.  Ask yourself if you want your clients to question the authenticity of every image you have ever and will ever make.  Look at the on-location images on your studio walls, albums or slide shows that took a lot of work to achieve.  Do you want people to assume they were done in a computer?  We’re already hearing that question.  Imagine the loss of trust and respect for our work that is occurring.  Instead of being amazed by the planning, luck, and effort our work requires, people are beginning to assume that our images were “simply” generated by a computer.

 

What if we have our clients’ full cooperation, and payment for location swaps?  Does that remove the ethics question?  Not at all!  The point of location swaps is not to mislead the subject, but to mislead viewers.  As an example, let's say it's 1969, and NASA comes to you, saying that they can’t make it to the Moon, so they want to stage a photo that looks like the astronauts were on the Moon. Then they'll tell everyone the astronauts were there.  So, the client (NASA) is satisfied because we gave them what they wanted.  Does that make it ethical?  The public was deceived, whether or not NASA actually told the lie.  Both the photograph and the verbal lie are the same!  They both intend to deceive the viewer. 

 

Let’s bring it down to Earth (literally) and say a high school senior girl wants to have a photograph of her under the Eiffel Tower.  She was never there but wants to tell her friends she was.  Should we be a part of such a farce?  No amount of money should entice us to participate in a deliberate lie.  Would it matter whether it was the client or us who chose to do the scene swap?  Either one is a deception.

 

How much value does a fake image hold for a client?  Let’s say you photographed a family in your studio, then digitally placed them at the beach.  Every time they look at that image they’ll know it’s a fake.

 

Consider the loss of the experience of actually being there, such as at a beach.  The family and you were deprived of the smells, sights and sounds of being at the beach... which is a major part of the portrait experience!  There’s a lot of talk these days about how we must deliver an exceptional experience.  How can using a green scene system achieve that? 

 

I urge you to go the extra mile (literally) and not computerize one of the most important services we have to offer... a real portrait experience with a product that has more personal and financial value. 

 

You may be thinking, “Why get so worked up over such a minor trick?  It’s just another tool and product to offer our clients.”  The reason that location swapping is so dangerous is that it eventually will cause confusion, mistrust and lack of respect for the entire portrait imaging profession.  It is a tragic misstep on a slippery slope toward even more impersonal service for our clients. 

 

I ask all photographers to look beyond the minor short term profit potential and consider the long term damage of a decision that each of us must make as we look toward the future of our industry.  Please maintain the basic integrity and honesty of your images.

 

I want to “fess up” and admit that I’ve tried it.  But even though my results were excellent, I didn’t feel right about it, and decided I’d never do it again.

 

I’m excited by the limitless opportunities that computer imaging offers for the advancement of our craft.  Used wisely, computers will open our world to creative options never before possible.  But as with any new technology, its misuse can also cause irreparable, irreversible harm.  Let’s not go down that path.

 

Comments

[Bill]

I'm giving you a standing ovation for this!

[kevinw]

Scene Swap + Portrait Professional = CG Portraits. The next competition category could be "Avatar Seniors".

[Amy Parish]

Amen brother.

[Lisa Sw.]

Thanks for shedding some light on this with client work. I was toying with the idea of calling it a "fantasy set-up"...I do a lot of H.S. Seniors and this would make a good "add-on" for a good price. Anyway, it really makes me think...thank you so much!

[Fuzzy]

I think it has its proper place. I want to learn the technique to photograph people in the studio and be able to drop different STUDIO backgrounds behind them. But to drop a location behind them is silly, deceptive and damaging to the respect we've worked so hard to achieve.

No amount of short-term payment is worth it.

[buy generic viagra]

This system is very peculiar picture, I would like to know more about the subject either to contact me or tell me where I can find more information! thanks ..

[generic viagra online]

Hey thanks very much for sharing this interesting information. Very nice information about "Scene Swap".... I want to know more about this topic. It's very interesting. Thanks very much!

- James, NY

[Fuzzy]

If you're interested in scene swaps, green screen is probably what you'll need to do. CS5 has excellent cut-out capablilities.

[viagra online]

Paella always make me think of speey gonzalez for some reason!!! Andale andale ariba!! This looks gorgeous, remember having it in Barcelona and loving it! I'm so glad you tried it out. I was thinking about this recipe just the other day, I have to do it again soon.
I made this yesterday and it was yum! Thank you.