Well, it just goes to show how insignificant those things are in the frame on a quick glance but, had I bought the image to hang on the wall, I would have been ever so slightly annoyed to discover how distracting those things were on closer inspection.
I think that is mainly what I do.
I noticed this effect when driving. Sometimes I will catch a glimpse of a scene that looks amazing whilst going past it, only to stop to take a photo and find that it looks nothing like what I perceived whilst moving.
Clouds are most frustrating because, whilst they are moving, you get a sense of 3D, which is very difficult to capture in a single still shot. This may be why some use ClearView Plus to try and separate the clouds more. The truth is, what you saw, whilst watching the clouds moving, is impossible to capture in 1/1000 second. To me, that justifies enhancing the contrast in order to record what I not only saw but experienced.
@mikemyers I am willing to bet that you didn’t even see the buildings on the horizon when you took the pelican shot. Your vision was on the main subject that you wanted to capture - the pelican. If that is what you were looking at, then removing things that distract, either by judicious framing or by cloning out, is better showing what you saw and wanted others to see in the photo. I can imagine someone looking at your photo and commenting on the buildings rather than what you perceived to be the subject. And it’s even worse when someone is distracted from the subject by things that catch the eye and draw it away form the intended focus of the image.
I really do get why you (Mike) think like you do about photojournalism but don’t forget, sometimes the most dangerous edit can be done when you take the picture - framing to avoid seeing what was going on around the subject.
When we were looking for a house here in France, we saw a lovely little cottage on the internet and asked the agent to take us to see it. What the (unretouched) photos didn’t show was that it was within metres of a pig farm!!! And yet such a photo fully qualifies as an accurate record of what was there and would be valid for a photojournalistic competition - just not a record of all of what was there
Mike, you must understand better than most how difficult it can be to capture a vehicle moving at speed, that is sharp, without getting the background sharp as well, thus looking like someone had just parked the vehicle. The key is to not only capture what you saw in an instant (a car on a race track) but also to convey that sense of speed that you experienced at the time.
As others have said, if you need to follow “rules” to validate an image for a competition or the like, then fine - do so for those situations. But I guess that not every photo that you take is going to be for that purpose. So, whilst you are not working as a photojournalist, and for the pleasure of others, try making images that are pleasing to look at rather than simply acting as a record of “facts”. That way, you will give yourself much more material to practice your editing skills in PL, some of which will benefit your “factual” work.
Since it seems to be difficult to take wider shots which do not contain distractions, try the challenge of taking small details like these…