> From: Bill <[email protected]> > > A couple of things: > 1) It's a matter of principal. It's a news photo, and thusly should be > as unmanipulated as possible. > 2) Where is the slippery slope? When does it become not OK to make > manipulations? Are we OK with not knowing if an image we are being > presented with is a representation of the real thing or not?
Was that the case here? What was the subject of the photo? The soldier or the video camera? If I pick up a candy bar wrapper that's littering the foreground in a landscape shot is that wrong? No. If I clone it out afterwards when I notice it. Is that wrong? No. This wasn't a case of a photographer manipulating a photo with intent to mislead the viewer. It was case of cloning out an unimportant element. What viewer looked at it and thought, 'Wow there's supposed to be a video camera down in the corner'? > > We aren't talking about a family portrait where we expect Aunt Maude to > look 10 years younger, and any manipulation that alters our perception > of the image is wrong, plain and simple. This includes extreme contrast > manipulation, extreme dodging and burning, removing or adding subject > matter, in fact anything that is done with the intention of obscuring > what was actually in front of the camera. > For myself, even using really long or really short focal lengths to > alter the image from a normal perspective can be an excessive manipulation. > > bill Come now, come now. You make me spit my wine out! Mr. Lens Inventory. Tom C. -- 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.
