I was staying away from this, but it looks like it was a blatant but unnecessary attempt to make the picture more dramatic, and more salable. I wouldn't put a more sinister spin on it than that. That's more than bad enough in a "news" photograph. I don't think I'll believe another thing that Reuters puts out however. They're just too incompetent to be believed, in every sense.
Perry Pellechia wrote: >Reuters was forced to retract a photo that a freelance photographer >edited before submission. Why they did not notice the lousy clone job >is beyond me, but I do not think the bad touch up effected the >"journalistic" value of the image too significantly. > >The story says "he was trying to remove dust marks and that he made >mistakes due to the bad lighting conditions he was working under," > >Wow, that must have been bad really lighting..... > > >http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13165165/ > > > -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
