Law For Digitally Altered Photographs

[ishutteratthethought]

Hello Folks,
Here is an interesting article from yesterday's NY Times describing a woman’s quest to have digitally altered photographs labeled by law as “retouched”.
Although the article & her reasoning is for our society to not be swayed by skinny models and promote anorexia, I found it to be an interesting debate and gives me more reason to stick with analog photography..... less temptation to alter.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/fa...oyer.html?_r=1

Steve

[keithwms]

Of course, it is also possible to do *major* revisions of a photograph by purely analogue means... were Hurrell's starlets really that perfect? And even St. Ansel himself essentially cloned out a sign on a mountain in a photograph. Sure, such things aren't considered unethical, but... just sayin'

It's an interesting argument, though.

[wfe]

Retouching has been going on since photography was invented. Anyone who believes it to be limited to or only a digital process is clearly not aware and knows little about photography.

[keithwms]

I agree Bill.

The difference in the digital case, though, is that the editing can take place at or even below the level of single pixels. So, in principle, it is possible for us to digitally graft your head onto Cindy Crawford's body, publish it, and nobody will ever know. :o And this can be done very quickly, inexpensively... and disseminated rapidly. In fact, the level of sophistication is now such that I could even do this in a motion picture... e.g. I could graft your head onto Suzanne Somer's body in a thighmaster commercial. Hell, I could graft your head onto Pamela Anderson's body in a porn movie with that nasty rocker dude. We have the technology (and this technology is actually way further ahead than most people realize, driven in part by security concerns, which has given a big boost to facial recognition software, and also of course high res gaming and entertainment).

So... while I agree that people can do all kinds of manipulations by purely analogue means, it's clear that digital takes the issue to a totally diofferent level... and invokes many more complicated ethical questions.

[ishutteratthethought]

There is retouching and there is total image manipulation, two different things in my mind. I am aware of retouching, double exposures etc with the analog process but you must admit, the tricks for analog manipulation are pretty limited.

[wiltw]

There is retouching and there is total image manipulation, two different things in my mind. I am aware of retouching, double exposures etc with the analog process but you must admit, the tricks for analog manipulation are pretty limited.

The real difficulty is defining with precision where one has crossed the line from 'retouching' to 'distortion', just as there is a fine and moving line between 'art' and 'pornography' that has been debated for a very long time.

[Jeremy]

There is retouching and there is total image manipulation, two different things in my mind.

And where will this line be drawn? That's the stickler--it has to be spelled out in black and white for it to be a law.

I am aware of retouching, double exposures etc with the analog process but you must admit, the tricks for analog manipulation are pretty limited.

I think your awareness of what you can do with analog manipulation is rather limited, not the process. A very obvious example: Jerry Uelsmann.

[David A. Goldfarb]

You might be surprised at the kinds of things that can and have been done extensively with hand retouching, masking, and stripping techniques. Unfortunately my old retouching manuals are in storage at the moment or I'd post a few examples, but most of the things that people are concerned about in the fashion and beauty world have been done for decades. They required more work and more skill than they do today, but the major advertisers and magazines had the budget for it.

[ishutteratthethought]

Jeremy, I meant in comparison.
Steve

[Bob Carnie]

There is nothing new, image comp has been around for over 100years, people have been lying with photos from day one.
Digital just allows you to lie much faster. Also 100x as many people can do this digitally .