Gregory, Perhaps you are correct and people are becoming more cynical about the photographs they view. With the likes of Wolfe and Fitzharris, I no longer look at them as nature photographers, but rather creators of nature beauty. I don't know if that is good or bad, it just is. National Geographic has learned its lesson. They blew it, they realized it and they made a big internal stink about it and essentially swore not to do it again. And they apologized to their readership. When easy digital manipulation first came into the fore, many thought it was "okay" to change a few elements here and there. Then the "rules" started to come out about digital manipulation and most major national or international publications choose not to allow digital manipulation. That's why Walski lost his job. There were the rules at the L.A. Times, and he broke them. I don't know about Time magazine. I remember vaguely the OJ incident, for which they caught a lot of flak. I thought they had established a policy against digital manipulation. Recently (perhaps even here) I heard about another manipulation that I believe was in Time: a manipulation of Saddam's mustache to appear more Hitler-like. I know nothing about that, but I would like to think that if it did happen, it was clearly marked as a photo manipulation. Those in the know may set me straight. Again, cynicism may now be the norm. But it seems to me that at least the LA Times and National Geographic are trying their darndest to fight the cynical attitude of their readers and establish a believability. Prominent firings, apologies and admonishments are their way of trying to reestablish their credibility with the public. It may or may not work, but I admire their efforts, small though they may be, in trying to maintain an image, and a policy, of as absolute an honesty as they can accomplish. Call me naive if you like, but I still think that MOST news organizations do strive for truth and accept no less. And yes, I do know there are exceptions, both here in the US and abroad, but they are usually easy to spot. peace, rand ----- Original Message ----- | | On the contrary, I think Alan is representational of why most of us feel | it's already far too late. People already believe that lies in photography | are common. Art Wolfe, Tim Fitzharris, National Geographic, Time, Inc. all | helped to bring this opinion into fruition. At least two nature | photographers, one science publication and a news magazine. Go figure. | | And, all they had to do was let their audience know. | | Take care, | Gregory david Stempel | FIREFRAMEi m a g i n g | |
