Removal of People from Portraits

[Akalai]

Originally Posted by Paul Howell

There is Art and then there is NEWS, altering NEWS is altering history and is just plain wrong. Altering Art, well that goes with the territory.

If only it was that simple.

Take the photograph, "Dead Taliban Fighter, Afghanistan" from the book "History" by Luc Delahaye. <photograph is visible here at the bottom of the page>

This is a photograph that has appeared both in newsprint as well as on the walls of art galleries.

Now is it "Art", "NEWS", both or neither?

[Markus Albertz]

...more thoughts: isn't the fact that the original photographs contained people a crucial piece of information that ought not to be missing? How would the viewer respond to the artwork if they did not know that they are (were) portraits by August Sander? It seems to suggest that the photographer found an 'innovative' way to utilize a well-known name to gain publicity.

Regards, MA

[David A. Goldfarb]

A good deal of contemporary art (as well as a fair amount of not-so-contemporary art) is art about art, so I think that knowing that the original photographs were by August Sander is part of appreciating the work. Not to know that would be like reading half of a book and believing you had read the whole thing.

[John Koehrer]

This is a perfect example IMO of marketing in the art world.
The artist has found someone he could influence & convince that this is art.
In my tiny little mind I find art like this a curiosity & not much more. Unless you're familiar with Sander's work would you recognize the new work as being derived from it? Would you care? Who cares?

[arigram]

I got through all this agony to get people IN my photographs and a schmuck comes and removes them?
I am sure there are pros working with photoshop charging for the removal of unwanted faces off photographs...