| I have been reading this thread with much interest and feel I must put in my two cents. I, too, have shot much advertising and have lied. However, I think we have to remember that what we are speaking of is photojournalism. What I do is NOT photojournalism. Ultimately, I believe we need to consider the expectation of the photo: Is the image trying to convey a product, looking its best so that sales will occur, or is it trying to convey a news event. I don't know about you, but I expect my cheeseburger to look nothing like the photo on the menu board, and I am OK with that. But, I also expect that images I see associated with reporting of news and other events to be truthful and accurate, without manipulation of content. If it is otherwise, I am not OK with that.
I respect and admire photojournalists more than perhaps just about anyone because they put themselves often in difficult and perilous situations, yet come away with stunning and emotive images that communicate REAL events. Of course, these go through the filter of the shooter, the editor, the publisher before they reach me. If they did not, all shooters would be providing the same images. We look for point of view and storytelling abilities, and that is what makes some photographers so special. But, to learn that content may be altered in a photo that I am expecting to REPRESENT reality shakes my faith and respect for that shooter, but not PJ as a whole.
We must remember the distinctions among the different disciplines of photography. If a working or aspiring photojournalist needs to digitally manipulate the content of his images to tell his story, he is not properly doing his job. He/she should pursue a career in advertising or editorial photography, which, as we should all know, is a different animal.
On Apr 19, 2007, at 6:52 AM, Herschel Mair wrote: Truth is indeed truth (Whatever that means) I never trusted photography to lead me to truth in the first place. But I did trust it to lead me to fun, adventure, and profit and it has served me well in this. I have done a lot of photo manipulation. since 1975 I can take a left hand thread truth and turn it into a right hand thread truth and generate income in the process. I have lied about the way cars look by putting up huge black flats before shooting, to smooth out reflections. I have made red wine look more beautifully red by putting light through the bottle and glass I have hired stylists and make up artists to alter reality for me In my days of photojournalism I have carefully chosen a camera viewpoint to get an image that illustrated the "Angle" that an editor wanted to use in a story. All photojournalists carefully choose their viewpoints to show the events as they see them. Now I work in Photoshop and lie through my teeth about so much stuff... People's skin conditions. lamposts in front of buildings, sky and clouds, cars, cranes, stop signs... all have fallen prey Sorry guys but we "Pros" have been conning the public for the longest time. hahahahahaaaaa. (Hysterical blair-witch-type running through the woods)
"Thruth is truth" and "Photography cannot be trusted any longer" I am amazed that these kind of statements could still be heard! Let's recall some basic facts about photography: - photography is a REPRESENTATION and, as such, it is, and it always was an interpretation, a cultural construct. - There is no such thing as a "true to reality" photograph! Any photograph implies framing, and framing is photographer's choice! He cannot photograph "reality" but just a fragment of it. The very nature of the medium imposes choice! So, who can seriously talk about "objective" photography? Radu Stern
Radu Stern
Tirage 35
1806 St. Légier
Switzerland
Tel: 0041-21-9434506
Cellular: 0041-79-2308584
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos.
|
