I hope this keeps happening until everyone figures out that there is
an art to journalistic photography, and sometimes you need to edit out
shit that distracts from the message.
Do news editors not edit the text in written pieces to make the story
"tighter", "more compelling", "more gripping", "more concise", etc? So
why are image journalists held to a different, more restrictive
standard?
Cheers,
—M.
\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com
http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment
On 23 January 2014 15:08, Igor Roshchin <s...@komkon.org> wrote:
>
> 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
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
