> So, Reuters admits it's mistake and has suspended the photographer. > Obviously they need a better type of review before release, > but I don't think you can throw out the baby with the bath water.
What I don't understand is how this gets through in the first place. Almost all modern journalists shoot on digital for speed reasons (your shot can be emailed to the office seconds after you take it, no waiting for processing). All high end digital cameras have the ability to insert authenticity info into the images that can be checked to see if the image has been altered in any way. Since ANY image manipulation is against journalistic rules (even "in camera" sharpening is frowned upon) I don't understand why the news agencies don't just check the file and reject any images not displaying the "original decision data" (as Canon call it). -- Jay -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/411 - Release Date: 07/08/2006 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:212781 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
