fbpx

DIY Photography

Hacking Photography - one Picture at a time

Search

 

Submit A Story

Confirmed: Peter Lik’s “Moonlit Dreams” is a composite

by 36 Comments

Not long ago, one of Peter Lik’s moon photos caused quite a stir. The community called him out for photoshopping the image, and Jared Polin has received the confirmation from Lik’s team. Yes, Moonlit Dreams is officially a composite.

As the debate over the photo was heating up, Jared contacted Lik’s studio for confirmation. After a while, they replied to his email confirming that the photo is, in fact, a composite. They added that they’ve been open about this topic even before the photo was released.

I think it’s great that Jared heard back from Lik’s studio and that they admitted the truth behind the photo. However, it doesn’t seem as they’ve been open about it from the start. As Jared points out, on the Moonlit Dreams website, you can’t find the information about whether it’s a composite or not.

As for Moonlit Dreams on Lik’s website, the link to the photo is now broken. When you search for it on the website, you’ll get no results. So, it appears Lik’s team has removed it from his website, although the dedicated Moonlit Dreams site is still up.

Jared points out that it probably wouldn’t affect the potential buyers if it was noted that the photo was a composite. I tend to agree: I believe most people would just buy a photo they like, no matter if it’s a composite or not. Lik’s team has confirmed it now, which is certainly a way to end this debate. Although, it probably would have spared them the stress if they did it earlier. I guess they should have noted it somewhere when the photo was published, at least in the fine print.

[CONFIRMED FAKE: Peter Lik’s Moonlit Dreams Is A Composite | Jared Polin; lead image: YouTube screenshot (left), Bagima (right)]

Related posts:

Photographer Convinces Live Nation CEO to Change ‘Work For Free’ Photography Policy Community calls Peter Lik out over “photoshopped” Moon photo Photographer Denied Access From Six Flags For Wearing An ‘I Shoot Raw’ T-Shirt India police couple fired over fake Photoshopped Everest climb photos

  • in the words of everyone who has used a camera and have seen this…creation “Yahh don’t say!”

  • Daniel Shortt

    I like how they still refer to it as a photograph. lol!

  • why would it affect sales. The people that buy these images don’t care

    • Its an ethics thing… If you don’t admit a photo is a composition and pass it off as an in camera capture then you are effectively lying. That is frowned upon in the photographic community. In fact bringing their photographic/journalistic integrity into question has ruined many photographers careers. It would be like going into a restrestaurant ordering a steak… Getting spam, then, still being told its a steak. That being said I don’t know whether or not this photographer did that. Have a good day

    • Jerimiah Miles I agree with you. However, I don’t think his clients are bothered. They pay enough for them, and probably look at them as art, rather than whether they are created from one image. Its generally only photographers that will be bothered enough to ask these questions

  • He has a WHOLE WEBSITE for ONE photograph?

  • George Salt

    Non-story? – all genres of photography including fine art and landscape have relied upon composites, negative manipulation, and fine printing skills for almost a century and a half. Since the inception of photography.

    The whole “get it right in camera” puritanical hand-wringing is a recent innovation, the primary goal of which is to drive gear sales.

    • TByte

      “get it right in camera” relates to exposures, white balance, focus points, etc.
      Composites (and bad ones, as “Moonlit Dreams” was) are a different story. They are not merely interpreting data, but fabricating it.

      • George Salt

        Fabricated data has been a part of photography since photography started. Outside of a journalistic context it’s not something to get worked up about. There is no purity of art or craft to be gained from using a single raw exposure.

        People are just pissed Lik’s got the business side of things licked and can make silly money selling his prints by the square foot.

  • Yes…we know…as does every other photography page we follow that shows in our news feeds lol.

  • Also confirmed: water is wet.

  • NS

  • De Nachtwacht van Rembrandt is a composite too.

  • Trino Pam

    Also confirmed: we already knew & who gives a fork?

  • pincherio

    Really sloppy work when you have clouds floating behind the moon.

    • GottaSay

      Are you sure? I think the clouds could have perfectly lined up on the edge of the moon. Kind of like that phantom picture where the dust redistributed itself in the shape of a woman just in time for him to capture it.

  • What always boggles my mind, is the outright inability of so many people, that are unable to truly observe the world around them, that an image such as this, isn’t obviously fake from the get go?!

  • He never said it wasn’t. Why is this “news worthy”?

    • Actually he did. If you even go to one of his galleries they are very stern in saying that Lik does not even use any photoshop. I’ve been to a few of his galleries and they all say the same thing. He’s also removed the photo from his sight.

    • He did actually say it was real. He stated how for many years the shot alluded him than one day everything lined up and the shot was made. (Paraphrased)

    • Christina Gault Walter weird, because in the email they sent to Jared Polin, they state they were up front with it being a composite.

    • Chris Lapointe nope. Not true. If you watch other stories on it he states his photos are real shots. Including this one. If you take a look at another shot he “took” he uses the same moon photo in it too. This was not from Jared Poplins video either.

    • Christina Gault Walter here is the link where you can see the email they sent to Jared. That being said, if people are up in arms, obviously someone was lying about it at one point or another.

      https://froknowsphoto.com/confirmed-fake-peter-liks/

  • I would like to go on record and say: “Duuuuh!” 😛

  • soul68

    Can we talk more about it just not being a very good image regardless? It’s pretty cheese whiz if you ask me.

    • TByte

      Yup.
      I’m no photoshop pro, but I wouldn’t have created that image even if I could.
      And people pay for it?

  • Brilliant marketing, now he is rich

  • Peter Lik, of course. He’s like the poster child for success via post-work.

  • Duh, really? Was your first clue perhaps the clouds BEHIND the moon!?!? :0(((

  • Who doubted about it?
    Who’s care?

  • lol shocker !!!

  • Anyone who knows a little bit about photography can tell you this shot cannot be achieved without compositing. But isn’t the final image what really matters? Nicely done.

  • kmlgraph

    Peter Lik haters in the house…including me. What a hack, but a rich hack.

Recent Posts