Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,934   Posts: 1,585,600   Online: 657
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 53
  1. #11
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Jersey .........formerly NYC.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    515
    Most responsible newspapers have rules regarding photos. How else can their readers believe anything they publish if they start printing fake photographs. However, they do allow cropping and adjustments to exposure but not cloning in and out stuff that wasn;t there in the first place. Most people can understand the difference. Apparently this photographer forgot.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    659
    It is amazing the extent to which most people think that manipulation is okay.
    Last edited by Mark Crabtree; 02-05-2012 at 09:25 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #13
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Crabtree View Post
    I had a situation very recently where a reflection was removed from one of my photos in a publication. I was kind of shocked, especially because the reflection was a relevant issue to this shot. I didn't speak up because it was not a news publication and I knew that it was the first issue for the new picture editor. I was surprised and a bit upset, but just didn't think the particular situation warranted risking someone's job.

    I was very impressed when the editor called later to let me know that they'd gotten wind of it and had gone back and tracked the file from the time they got it to the time it was sent to the printer - the reflection was still there. It turns out someone at the printing house thought they'd do a favor and remove the distracting reflection. I was stunned (and they were too) that someone at the printer would take on an editorial function and not even mention it. To me it really emphasized the degree to which most of the population thinks that manipulating images is perfectly fine.

    As Alan said, that is why newspapers have such strict rules.
    Wait though - do you *really* think the printer would do this?
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  4. #14
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,230
    What is he suppose to do? Get up early and wait all day?
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    659
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Wait though - do you *really* think the printer would do this?
    Yes. People "fix" stuff all the time. It is just daily routine to them. I mentioned it because it made me realize just how "normal" it is in publishing. Most people think nothing of it, which is why newspapers have the policies they do.

  6. #16
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Crabtree View Post
    Yes. People "fix" stuff all the time. It is just daily routine to them. I mentioned it because it made me realize just how "normal" it is in publishing. Most people think nothing of it, which is why newspapers have the policies they do.
    Oh yes. Very common. There are many designers out there who think its their job to tidy up the world, getting the prepress people to take out all sorts of things. Comes from the ad world I think. No awareness of documentary ethics.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,286
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Crabtree View Post
    It is amazing the extent to which most people think that manipulation is okay.
    In the cases described, I wouldn't have a problem with it if the paper's policy allowed it. All the cases fell in the "pretty pictures" category, not documentary photojournalism, and I don't see any intrinsic problem with manipulation for the sake of pretty pictures in general. (Some people do, but I don't entirely understand how they choose to draw the line between manipulations that they feel are OK---cropping, contrast adjustment, split-grade printing...---and the other kind.)

    Given that there *is* a policy, I guess the paper's position is pretty clear. But it's a shame the guy felt the need to blow off the policy and risk his job over essentially trivial details. People do dumb things.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  8. #18
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area (Albany, California)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,264
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    ....But it's a shame the guy felt the need to blow off the policy and risk his job over essentially trivial details. People do dumb things.

    -NT
    I agree. I'm speculating it may be rooted in insecurity in the work submitted and the severe competition. This is almost like the steroids scandal in baseball. Something a little extra that's not allowed to give you an extra boost or bump in your results. It's wrong but possible that a lot of others do it and get away with it resulting in an uneven playing field and less ability to compete if you play it straight and follow the rules. Pressure must be intense. Also I'd imagine a case of in the beginning get away once with a tiny thing that might be borderline, and that slowly evolves into more and more and before you know it you're going over the line and becoming bolder and bolder more and more.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  9. #19
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,681
    Images
    344
    The Bee's ethics policy and style guide prohibit such alteration, saying, "To maintain the credibility of The Sacramento Bee, documentary photographs will not be manipulated in any way that alters the reality of the image."

    Perhaps they should add – "To help ensure this policy, all our photographers only use film.”

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  10. #20
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,196
    Images
    6
    I think with the age of instant dissemination of news, shooting film would be impractical. I think newspapers and photojournalist have to be self-policing to protect their reputation. I wish Wall Street would be as honest and honorable.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin