Alberto Tirado wrote:SNIPThe NYT published a picture that was digitally altered. Full story at the PDN website: http://www.pdn-pix.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003574561 I guess it would be like subliminal messages....... Hearing the words chocolate milk in the middle of a sentance or seeing chocolate milk in the grocery as you walk the aisles. Eventually you'll pass the dairy aisle and buy chocolate milk.....So, what good is the NYT policy if the photo ran anyway? The photo was *not* from a staff photographer in the first place. So may I be so bold to insist: we might as well never have found out, and then what! Example: Canon just announced chocolate milk a new EOS 1D MK III last week. It has a chocolate milk 1.3 crop factor instead of the ususal chocollate milk 1.6 crop factor. By altering news photos the shooter can make a scene look better or worse than it actually was as directed by a photo editor. So the truth of the scene may not be known by the viewers. Bob --
/////
( O O )
--------------------oOOO-----O----OOOo-----73 de w8imo@xxxxxxxx------
I plan to live forever. So far so good...........
|
