An interesting article describing what field photographers can and cannot do to photographs they submit to Reuters. As you may recall, Reuters was embarrassed when it was discovered that a photograph of a bombing in Beirut was digitally enhanced (cloning was used to intensify the smoke coming off the bombing site).
<
http://blogs.reuters.com/2007/01/18/the-use-of-photoshop/>
Regards,
Rafael
#1
Now that is interesting.
It's about time that news agencies set some limits.
Thanks for posting.
peace
#2
You are welcome!
#3
Interesting - dont know who their "imaging expert" is though
"Sharpening at 300%, 0.3, 0"- every image?
"Subtle use of burn tool" Burn Tool, who still uses that? "careful sue of lasso tool" - still generating crude lasso selections I guess
Just goes to show that most photographers are not retouchers I guess. Within those rules you can still do a lot.
#4
So what I want to know is were the doctored pics in the linked story Reuters pics? and will the photographers or who ever did it be fired for doctoring a news pic? <br><br><a href="
http://www.fantent.com/2007/01/31/aqua-teen-hunger-force-med ia-alters-photos/">
http://www.fantent.com/2007/01/31/aqua-teen-hunger-force-med ia-alters-photos/</a>
#5
Could this be a reason for news mongers to force the use of Adobe Lightroom or Apple Aperture so that news photographers can't do any more to the photos than what they could have done in the darkroom 20 years ago?
#6
Reuters is only doing this because they got caught, and they will do the very least they have to. They have no interest in presenting the news in a balanced unbiased way.
#7
Like the many things that can be done in an image-editing program to alter the "documented reality" of a news photo, it is amazing how much reality can be twisted by simply cropping it out. Reuters (and every other paper, and TV news agency) does that simple thing every day.
It is impossible to not give a slant or add some misdirection during news coverage...always has been.
As Ed said, Reuters is continuing to react to their negative image since being caught. It's a nice jesture... and maybe it will make a photographer think twice about tweaking a file too much in post. But it won't change much in the grand scheme of "journalistic reality." There's always going to be lots of gray area to sift through, and that job falls onto the eyes of the consumer of the news.
#8
It's a nice jesture
LOL!
Great pun!
#9
LOL! Great pun!
LOL thanks... totally unintentional, but I'll take a bow anyway.
#10
Buko said:
So what I want to know is were the doctored pics in the linked story Reuters pics? and will the photographers or who ever did it be fired for doctoring a news pic?
There was one Reuters picture (the one showing a bombing in Beirut, with smoke rising from buildings). The photographer eventually got fired.
#11
The really sad thing about the picture with the "enhanced" smoke over Beirut was that the person who doctored the photo was a complete hacksomeone without a clue about using the Rubber Stamp tool in such a way as to disguise cloning patterns.
He should have been fired just for being a dilettante at his craft, if for nothing else.
On the flip side of this (and I wish I could spend the time to find a link or two right now) but on the horizonand in testing phase right nowis software that uses algorithms which can detect pixel shifting, even when done by someone who knows generally how to avoid the telltale signs that got the Reuter's guy busted. And the people funding the research are news agencies, so they can avoid this kind of embarrassment in the future.
#12