On 11/19/2015 2:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote:
B&W Film the standard for Newspaper work until sometime in the 80's
was the raw of it's day. Here's the thing, either you trust your
trained witnesses, (reporters and photographers), or you fire them and
get someone you can trust.
MARK!
It wouldn't be so bad if the fakes were clever and hard to spot, but
most were obvious fakes. That speaks almost as poorly for the
intelligence of the editorial staff as it does for the honesty of the
reporting staff. As has been pointed out there are a number of ways to
spoof the EXIF data in a jpeg file, and a talented Photoshop user can
produce nearly undetectable revisions. I read in the comments of that
article that some Nikon Cameras embed a checksum in each picture file,
in an attempt to thwart modifications, but hell once you know how any
number id generated, it's just as easy to replace that as well.
On 11/19/2015 12:00 AM, ann sanfedele wrote:
funny, I thought you shot film a while back :-)
On 11/18/2015 11:50 PM, knarf wrote:
I've never shot anything other than a jpeg in my life. Nice to know
I've still got a chance with Reuters.
Cheers,
frank
On November 18, 2015 11:42:40 PM EST, ann sanfedele
<[email protected]> wrote:
Gee no I don't, please explain
a
On 11/18/2015 3:21 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
"Steve Cottrell" <[email protected]> wrote:
Interesting!
<http://petapixel.com/2015/11/18/reuters-issues-a-worldwide-ban-on-raw-
photos/>
This strikes me as a decision that was made by upper management
people, if you know what I mean.
--
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.
