Just curious

[Glenda]

If all exif is stripped before submitting an image on the web, is it possible to see what, if any, editing has been done?

[Gazza]

I can only see camera and lens information along with the software used.
There's nothing on how it was cropped, cloned, add-ons used (Niks Collection, etc) or skies swapped, all those things I/we all do

Do others see more?

[ameerat42]

Often I can see what (or a summary of what) has been done in PP.
Post one in this thread and let's see

[Mark L]

If all exif is stripped before submitting an image on the web, is it possible to see what, if any, editing has been done?

Do you mean you can see what editing has been done when ExIF isn't stripped??

Often I can see what (or a summary of what) has been done in PP.

So what do you use to show a summary of what has been done with PPing?? I can only ever see the original camera settings?
I'd love to access what people do in PPing so I can learn, but I suspect we cannot see.

[farmmax]

If all exif is stripped before submitting an image on the web, is it possible to see what, if any, editing has been done?

Stripping EXIF does not stop forensic software from indicating which areas of .jpgs have been edited.

[Glenda]

Thanks guys. I was just wondering because our local camera club has included "colour print - no editing allowed" for a theme next year. Personally, I think it's a silly topic as the only truly unedited photo is a raw straight out of camera. Then I wondered, how any judge would be able to tell if any editing has been done but maybe they all have this forensic software farmmax mentioned. We do submit images via the web for judging.

[Gazza]

If there's a 'Sheep Station' or two riding on the results, they might ask you for the original

[Glenda]

No sheep stations Gaz - I just get frustrated and sometimes argumentative when they put in stupid (well it is to me) themes or put restrictions on them. Last year we had 'old' and they put it had to be over 50 years - I successfully had that restriction removed as age is relative to the subject.

[ricktas]

Thanks guys. I was just wondering because our local camera club has included "colour print - no editing allowed" for a theme next year. Personally, I think it's a silly topic as the only truly unedited photo is a raw straight out of camera. Then I wondered, how any judge would be able to tell if any editing has been done but maybe they all have this forensic software farmmax mentioned. We do submit images via the web for judging.

Which is why we have never had a comp with no editing allowed, cause you cannot determine in any way if editing has been done. Cropping is an edit. Levels adjustments are an edit. A JPG file might tell you 'edited in adobe photoshop', but it cannot tell you what edits have been done. The only way to determine this is if you have access to the actual RAW file, alongside the 'print' presented. Even then you would need to look at the pixel level, considering brightness, colour saturation, kelvin etc to determine if the final 'entry' was edited.

Just cause a JPG says in its EXIF that it was edited in Photoshop..etc, could just mean that it was brought in as a RAW and then saved straight away as a JPG. with no edits at all. Interestingly the JPG algorithm could be defined as an edit, cause it alters the way the photo exists.

[ameerat42]

Do you mean you can see what editing has been done when ExIF isn't stripped??

Mark. EXIF contains a HEAP of stuff, not just camera settings.

So what do you use to show a summary of what has been done with PPing?? I can only ever see the original camera settings?
I'd love to access what people do in PPing so I can learn, but I suspect we cannot see.

The same EXIF viewers as for the camera settings. FxIF and Exif Viewer for me.

[Lance B]

Strictly speaking, a jpeg straight out of the camera is in fact still an edit. In camera, I can have the following adjustments to a jpeg image:
Sharpening, Clarity, Contrast, Brightness, Saturation and Hue. Added to that, I can set White Balance how I want as well.

I find these "straight out of camera" competitions a bit silly.

[Warbler]

I'm with you Lance. You can even do multiple exposures in-camera. Do these people remember the tricks that people used to get up to in the darkroom? I can see the edits in the EXIF data of my files in Adobe Bridge, so they are embedded in the EXIF somewhere. I recall seeing them in an EXIF viewer at one time too. Might have been FxIF. Of course you can strip those details yourself when Saving for Web.

[ricktas]

I'm with you Lance. You can even do multiple exposures in-camera. Do these people remember the tricks that people used to get up to in the darkroom? I can see the edits in the EXIF data of my files in Adobe Bridge, so they are embedded in the EXIF somewhere. I recall seeing them in an EXIF viewer at one time too. Might have been FxIF. Of course you can strip those details yourself when Saving for Web.

And some now let you do multiple exposure HDR in-camera processing, so the images you get off your card are a processed HDR. S'pose it is no different to the multiple exposure film images, even back in the 1800's.

[Glenda]

Which is why we have never had a comp with no editing allowed, cause you cannot determine in any way if editing has been done. Cropping is an edit. Levels adjustments are an edit. A JPG file might tell you 'edited in adobe photoshop', but it cannot tell you what edits have been done. The only way to determine this is if you have access to the actual RAW file, alongside the 'print' presented. Even then you would need to look at the pixel level, considering brightness, colour saturation, kelvin etc to determine if the final 'entry' was edited.

Just cause a JPG says in its EXIF that it was edited in Photoshop..etc, could just mean that it was brought in as a RAW and then saved straight away as a JPG. with no edits at all. Interestingly the JPG algorithm could be defined as an edit, cause it alters the way the photo exists.

I've put in my 2 bobs worth but doubt it will be changed. Feel sorry for the judge for as you say just resizing for web will show up as being in PS in my case.

Strictly speaking, a jpeg straight out of the camera is in fact still an edit. In camera, I can have the following adjustments to a jpeg image:
Sharpening, Clarity, Contrast, Brightness, Saturation and Hue. Added to that, I can set White Balance how I want as well.

I find these "straight out of camera" competitions a bit silly.

I agree - very silly. I took a couple of jpegs the other day just to see the results and yes changed white balance, picture standard - I know I can adjust the amount of sharpening, contrast etc too just can't remember where it is, so will have to wait until I get home again and check the manual. I did question on our fb page if 'no editing allowed' meant we had to submit a raw image sooc. The secretary replied basically yes but she would be shooting jpeg for this. My reply was ah, so editing is allowed just to be done in camera rather than the computer.

[farmmax]

I've been participating in the Canon Light Awards. Image the surprise when one of the briefs was to shoot in jpeg and make use of the picture styles in the camera instead of editing with the computer.

What an eye opener, because I've never done that before. It is amazing the photos the camera can produce. Sometimes when people on here have said their image is SOOC, I've looked at the results with disbelief. Now I don't, because fiddling with picture styles is very powerful. In the Canons you can even load in your own personalised styles. How on earth can your camera club or any competition insist on an unedited photo?

Perhaps if you have time Lplates, you might like to have a play with your camera picture styles, and try and produce two photos of the one scene. Make one an unaltered jpeg from the raw file, and the other using the most extreme picture styles your camera can produce. Put both of them in front of the camera club and say "right, both of these were produced straight from the camera, now which one are you going to accept?"

If you have a Canon, the software which came with it includes a picture style editor. You could create an extreme style, and then upload it into your camera. It's good fun to play with

Probably the only way fair way to produce an "unedited" photo is to use a polaroid camera and take photos in front of everyone else, or all use disposable cameras, which are then processed at the one lab at the one time.

Years ago someone on a forum commented that they thought editing of photos was unfair, that was, until they learned how to use photoshop. Then they considered editing was fair I think that is a true statement. The people demanding no "editing", often have little or no skill at editing. Is that the case with the people demanding "unedited" photos in your camera club?

[Glenda]

I think that is the case here Farmmax. I think some of the people on the committee - who rarely enter the comps anyway - have limited, if any, editing skills. I think they assume this will level the playing field. Obviously that won't be the case as some members will know what their cameras are capable of and employ everything available and of course some cameras will also have more to offer. The ones who can't be bothered learning how to edit, probably won't be bothered learning what their camera can do either. I'll just have to have a play..

Just another question if I change the amount of sat, contrast, sharpening etc my camera adds to a jpeg - that doesn't affect my raw image does it. It will be a real pain if I have to change settings back every time I think something might work as a jpeg.

[Mark L]

Just another question if I change the amount of sat, contrast, sharpening etc my camera adds to a jpeg - that doesn't affect my raw image does it.

That may be an interesting thread in itself.
Not sure but think sharpening has an effect on both. The raw is the raw so you can readjust other things. (I assume you have your camera set to take jpeg and raw at the same time.)

[farmmax]

Just another question if I change the amount of sat, contrast, sharpening etc my camera adds to a jpeg - that doesn't affect my raw image does it. It will be a real pain if I have to change settings back every time I think something might work as a jpeg.

No, a raw file is a raw file, but the pictures settings do affect the thumbnails you see viewing the raw file on the camera, or in some software on your computer. Don't forget many raw files carry a full size jpg embeded in the raw file. My 50D certainly does. That's why I don't waste my time shooting Raw + jpg. There is a nifty piece of free software http://michaeltapesdesign.com/instan...-from-raw.html which permits you to right click on a folder with raw images in it and it will extract all the jpgs and dump them in a folder along with the raw files. It can do hundreds of raw files in under a minute.

My Adobe Camera Raw wipes out any picture settings associated with a raw file, but if you use Canon's DPP software, the picture settings are bought in with the raw file. Once in DPP you can choose to keep the picture settings, change to another picture setting, or just choose the raw default.

I only know this because of the Canon brief. Because I didn't want to shoot in jpg, I had to try and find a way of bringing the Picture Settings into Photoshop along with the raw file. I didn't realize how difficult it could be. In the end, as I view my photos in Faststone, I moved them from there into DPP (have a keyboard shortcut to do that), and then straight from DPP into photoshop with a built in shortcut of ALT + P. This opened in Photoshop as a tiff, and from memory as a 16bit file, complete with the picture settings applied.

I'm not sure if modern versions of Camera Raw permit the picture settings to be applied to raw files or not. Perhaps someone else can tell me.

You can go online and look for Canon Picture Settings presets and download them. If you find one you really like, you can use it in DPP, or to confound the non editing people even more, load it into your camera as a custom setting for the camera to apply to your photos. I'd find a really outlandish one to try and prove a point

[Glenda]

Thanks Mark and Farmmax. I actually shoot a Nikon but assume there would probably be something similar. I tried a couple of landscapes in jpeg yesterday - massive fail - way too high contrast and either blew out parts of the sky or foreground too dark. I know I can do in camera hdr but believe even the slightest movement would leave a halo or ghosting, so definitely would need a tripod which I didn't have with me yesterday. Think I'll look for one of those presets if available for Nikon - would love to post an over the top effect as a sooc shot on the club's facebook page.

[farmmax]

I had a quick google and most Nikons have something that sounds identical - Picture Controls. You can create customs pictures controls, which is probably what you will need to do to produce something special. It would be a good challenge

This link seems to cover what the Nikon version does, if you haven't already read it
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and...p-by-step.html

It shows you how to create and load custom Picture Controls, plus the software to do it in.