From: Bruce Walker
On 11-07-29 3:34 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
http://www.fourandsix.com/photo-tampering-history/
It seems that when the pendulum swings, it goes right on through the
wall. The largely politically motivated tampering to deceive is
unarguably bad (unarguable by *us* anyway), but that 2011 item about the
photog who merely removed his shadow from a soccer shot, and then was
fired and had all his stock shots removed -- holy crap almighty! I call
that a way over the top excessive response.
Next, will photogs be castigated when it's discovered that their cameras
have done hot pixel removal and replaced a truthful (though 100% white)
pixel with a new lying pond-scum average of the surrounding pixels?
On the whole, I think it's better for a NEWS organization to draw the
line too strictly rather than not strictly enough.
By far, the most egregious examples appear to be political, removing the
King, removing the (future) President, removing those who have fallen
out of favor ... or adding someone to an image for the purpose of
smearing a political opponent.
And basically, all of these manipulations are discovered because they
are poorly done or because the original was available for comparison.
Which raises the question of how many manipulations were NOT detected?
How many times did the manipulators succeed in changing the narrative of
history? How many times did lies prevail over the truth?
We really don't know, but that brings us back to "it's better for a NEWS
organization to draw the line too strictly ..."
--
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.
