They seem to be getting more uptight in the digital age.
An adjustment that might have been acceptable with dodging & burning and
color balance working from film in prior years will get you fired for
manipulation if done today using digital images.
What actually can be considered a "basic correction" is changing.
From: David Parsons
PJ works under very strict protocols regarding editing pictures. They
make sure that they don't tolerate any appearance of misconduct and
when it is found, they react like they do as a message to others.
Basic corrections are already allowed, contrast, levels, etc. You
cannot materially change the picture via editing.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
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?
-bmw
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3801 - Release Date: 07/31/11
--
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.
