On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 04:48:10PM -0600, William Robb wrote: > > As soon as you start altering the content of a news photograph, you are on a > slippery slope. Remove a street lamp here, add in a missile there. It's > comes down to what degree of being a liar is OK.
It always has been about that. I can be just as selective in deciding where to stand, what angle of view to show, and even which of a series to choose to best get across the point I'm trying to make, even before any post-exposure manipulation. A photograph only shows what you choose to read into it. I'm reminded of the story of three rail travellers on a journey across the Scottish border. They look out of the window, and see a black sheep standing in a field. "Aha!" says the first fellow. "Sheep in Scotland are black!" "Not necessarily" says the second. "All we know is that there is at least one black sheep in Scotland". "Not even that" says the third. "But we do know that there is a sheep in Scotland that is black on at least one side". > Sorry, this is pretty close to a political diatribe. > We can agree to disagree and still be friends, right? Sure. Wouldn't have it any other way. > William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
