Photoshopping baby pictures?

[Kitkat973]

One of my best friends just had her second daughter. I usually do photo retouching for her of both herself and her four-year-old. It's about fifty/fifty of her requesting a picture redone and me asking for raws to keep my hand in. She's always been happy with the results.

 

There are a lot of photos up of her new daughter- would it be inappropriate of me to edit some of them as a gift for her for a baby book?

 

If it makes any difference, I'm not looking to change the child's appearance. It's subtler things, like correcting color balance, removing the natural splotches from birth, and taking away the blue cast from her hands. I've never been a 'glamor' editor- generally, people can only tell my editing isn't the original photograph if they look at them side by side.

 

I don't think it's something she'd mind since she's had me do a lot of editing in the past, but on the same token, I'm not a mother and I don't know if it'd be treading on her toes or seen as 'your baby is ugly, let me make it pretty'.

[Fluttershy]

Considering that you're not airbrushing the baby's face and photoshopping make-up on your friend, you're probably fine.

 

But to be on the safe side, keep copies of the originals just in case.

[abitbroken]

First of all, are you creating a special album as a gift to the parents, or are you going to just grab their baby book and and do the retouching without announcing it? If these are photos that you took of the baby or already have on hand in a similar fashion, I think it would be nice to make up a small collection of photos in a scrap book or special album and fix weird dim lighting, color balances, or the finger from the photo taker drifting into the photo and give it to them on a special occasion. They might be delighted to receive photos they hadn't seen. I would leave the baby's birthmarks and splotches as this is what the baby looks like and how the parents see the baby - it most likely will even out over time and they can look back at how the baby has grown. I think that if you are just going to grab some baby photos in their possession and surprise them, it could be overstepping your bounds and send a message that their photos are not good photos. If they are happy with the photos they took, leave them alone. Save your editing for a special photo that you personal take of the baby intended for presentation to them.

[BellaDonna]

If it makes any difference, I'm not looking to change the child's appearance. It's subtler things, like correcting color balance, removing the natural splotches from birth, and taking away the blue cast from her hands. I've never been a 'glamor' editor- generally, people can only tell my editing isn't the original photograph if they look at them side by side.

 

Hmmm. All I can say is that it depends heavily on the parents. When I had my son he had a "stork bite" on his skin. It was a cute mark and it made him who he is. When I took him for his first portrait the photographer mentioned that they could airbrush the stork bite out if I wanted them to. I don't know why but it bothered me. I said "I would never dream of airbrushing my child. This is who he is and it is his little trademark".

He's almost 4 now and the mark only shows up if he gets red when he is mad. lol But when he was little I adored it.

 

I didn't even want his frizzy little stray baby hairs to be airbrushed out of the pics. That's just me though.

[Seraphim]

I think it is a nice idea. I would not remove the baby's natural look though. Like Bella's son my son had a big stork bite or "angel kiss" as I call them on his fore head. It was almost shaped like a diamond and it would get very dark if he cried or got mad. It still comes out now if he gets mad. It is just part of him, ya know? He has more angel kisses up the back of his head almost in a cross shape and I just feel all their little marks and imperfections make them who they are. You are such a nice friend to think of doing something so nice for your friend.

[Kitkat973]

Thanks for all the input. As she's unfortunately on the other side of the country, taking my own isn't an option- I was mostly looking to improve some of the pictures that would probably not be kept over time because of flaws in the photographs. It's good to get different perspectives, and instead of putting together a package as a gift, I'll instead ask her if she wants any retouched. Thank you!

[OptomisticGirl]

I def think it's a nice gesture. Retouching lighting is fine, doing something artistic with it yeah but as far as photo shopping the baby or anything to do with the baby out, eh. I love photoshop but sometimes it's the unprofessional pictures you keep the longest. I have this one favorite picture of my niece from when she was a baby, the lighting is horrible but her blue eyes just stand out and it's a bit blurry from were she started to knock my hand as I took it but it's framed and hanging on my wall. I would just ask though.

[abitbroken]

Here's another idea. Why not give her lighting tips, give her a reflector or a better camera as a gift? The price of a camera with decent megapixels is really coming down and some of the smaller ones do take some great pictures are under $200. Maybe not professional Vogue cover quality, but really nice for snapshots and such. Instead of making her dependent upon you, she can learn from you how to take better pictures - like paying attention to where the sun is and sometimes turning off an incandascent bulb or using the right setting on the camera. That way she starts out with a better photo to begin with and you are only on a rare occasion working on one of her photos if she is giving it as a gift. Also, then she doesn't take advantage of you and send you every single snapshot. Maybe things are fine now, but if you really get busy, and don't have time to play with all of her photos or get a professional job doing it - is she going to "expect" that you continue to do it. Maybe you want to keep things as they are so she needs you, etc. = even unconsciously.