philljm said:I do know that Bill often photoshops his intros. ~Jan
pet peeve: I hate the verb "to photoshop" -- not because of grammar, but because of the implication. Photo editing tools (not just photoshop) have been used so often for wrong reasons, including falsifying images to use in news reports, that anytime one hears "it was photoshopped," it tends to translate in the brain to "it was falsified." Often-times, it just means it was edited.
Every photo should be edited -- it's a rare photo that does NOT need editing when viewed straight from the camera. Back in the film days, editing was done in the darkroom, and it wasn't as easy, but it was still possible. Some people crop photos to take out distracting background, others correct color-cast or brightness/darkness...those should all be acceptable edits. Editing to put a bloom in a frame or box, and add a name directly to the image -- again, acceptable editing.
Editing to manipulate the actual image and imply that there are toothy edges on every petal/sepal when there really aren't? Unacceptable editing, because it's falsifying the image. Editing the color? Could be acceptable if attempting to bring the displayed picture more in line with what was actually seen in the garden. Unacceptable if attempting to change the actual color of the bloom, presenting something different from reality.
Just my 2 cents, and worth about as much as you paid to read them.
