|
I agree with your point Greg; that’s
one reason that I favor film over digital. I offered the cheerleader story more
as a humorous anecdote than a comment on the ethics of photography. PW From: owner- >>>> The whole point of messing with an image is to make it tell the story
better.<<<<< WRONG! Altering an image, diverting from the actual event captured
on film or censor is nothing more than someone's interpretation or intention.
People dilute. They will dilute the truth, actions or interpretations of almost
anything to further their own gains. It is that simple. Lots of you will argue that truth is up for grabs, that your
lifestyle sees colors differently than mine. Wrong. Truth is truth.
It's your lack of discipline or ethics that are really to
blame. A selfish need to have more and we can't be satisfied
until we have added our own flavor. Just because you
don't see any harm in enhancing a scene, appearing innocent
enough, doesn't mean you haven't played with or diluted the truth. Increasing contrast is not altering the truth, unless it
hides something in the shadows, regardless of the end result. Adding shadows
under breast lines to "enhance" a figure is altering the truth,
period. But, diluters see it as OK, because it appears to harmlessly add an
innocent bit of fluff. If that same shadow made the girl look like she was flat
breasted, the offender would be attacked as un-ethical. And, don't give me this crap that cropping or burning and
dodging have always been around. So what, they don't alter the context,
just the content. There is big difference between the two. Photography can no longer be trusted. That's a crime no
matter how you try to shake free. Take care, |
