TildalWave (~👋)<p>Someone in my Mastodon feed recently asked, if it's alright to edit photos they take before publishing them? Forgive me for not finding that toot to reply to, but, as a hobbyist photographer myself, I feel compelled to respond regardless;</p><p>The TL;DR answer (applies to most cases): Absolutely!</p><p>The longer answer is, that unless you're trying to demo, review or give opinion of your photographic equipment or editing software, or you're pressed for time and you absolutely have to publish as soon as possible, then it's IMHO basic courtesy towards your readership to at least edit for:</p><p>• intended <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/composition" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>composition</span></a> (orientation, aspect ratio & cropping, straightening, perspective correction,...), </p><p>• <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/clarity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>clarity</span></a> (correcting unwanted lens aberrations, adjusting contrast, levels, sharpness, noise reduction,...) and </p><p>• <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/colour" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>colour</span></a> (white balance, saturation, hue, tint, vibrance,...). </p><p>How to apply these will depend on the purpose of your photo. If you want to document a scene, keep to minimal editing that will try to match what you saw with your own eyes when taking the photo. And if you want to be artistic and experiment with creative photography, then anything goes (but be bold about it!).</p><p>And once you're happy with those adjustments, also don't forget to consider its dimensions and file size (resolution, compression, file format,...) before uploading it. There's no point in uploading, say, a 24 Mpix image (common sensor size with <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/COTS" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>COTS</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/ILC" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>ILC</span></a> cameras) to a website that will only ever display it at up to <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/FullHD" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>FullHD</span></a> resolution. In this case, you'd end up uploading 12 times what's needed. Resized in advance will also render better since it won't go through website's or web browser's rescaler and there's less chance people will "appropriate" your work for their own use without attribution, since they wouldn't have access to more re-publishable, re-editable full resolution version.</p><p>There's a lot of software out there, many of them completely free, that can do all of this more or less acceptably with a single click, then, if you have the time and know-how, you can fiddle with intended look from there onward.</p><p>Additionally, doing this will also force you into reviewing your published materials before posting, so it will prove to be safer. Not everyone needs to know where you live, or be able to read your passwords post-it on your high resolution photo of your pet!</p><p>If you regularly publish photos, you MUST do at least these things described above. Anything else is lazy, sloppy, or careless!</p><p><a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/Photography" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Photography</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/Retouching" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Retouching</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/Opinion" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Opinion</span></a></p>