Hello Igor, I think the removal of the video camera makes a lot of
difference in the meaning of the photo (e.g. how it is read by viewers).
Without the camera, the picture looks like shot "in the wild", in actual
action. On the contrary, with another camera within the frame, the whole
situation looks like (badly) "staged" or at least taken in a crowd of
photojournalists. The picture can be substantially the same, but the effect
on the public is much different.
Other than that, even if removing that camera did not affect how the photo
is perceived, I understand why people at AP want and try to keep their
reputation of "pictures as they are, period" as much as possible. Otherwise,
their own role and the whole PJ business could easy go down the toilet.
As much as I appreciate Mr. Contreras and his job (I think he's one of the
very best photojournalists around), I think he was wrong in doing that. Now
he is right in taking his responsibility.
In brief:
A mistake on Mr. Contreras' part, perhaps under pressure.
A harsh but correct move on AP side.
A good behaviour by Mr. Contreras in recognizing the mistake and assuming
its consequences.
My faith in both AP and Mr. Contreras is highest now.
Dario
-----Messaggio originale-----
From: Igor Roshchin
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 9:08 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping
I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
whatever the photo presents.
It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
modification.
While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
on a part of the photograph.
I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
but that's totally different.
I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
molehill.
Igor
Thu Jan 23 13:11:02 EST 2014
Mark Roberts wrote:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-23/pulitzer-photographer-narciso-conteras-fired-syria-ap/5215200
--
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.
-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 2013.0.3462 / Database dei virus: 3681/7027 - Data di rilascio:
23/01/2014
--
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.
