Not like the fence post that was missing from the kent stateimage or the zillion other pj image there where retouched should have had it done. But Don't these guys learn? So many have been fired in the past 10 years for this stuff. I would argue hugely that its the difference between a photograph and a photoshopped image. They are more covering their asses legally for something that small. I guarntee every image you see on a news site has has significant post processing in some form or another. He should have just said I can burn that in so you can't see it in the dark room . cause thats still and everyday event. Notice something different? The right one was used for nearly 2 decades. http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/08/22/weekinreview/29701999.JPG
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Bob <w8imo@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Some time ago we had a Photo Editor from the local newspaper speak at a camera club meeting.
When Photoshop came up she told us about a shot one of the pjs took at the local annual air show, The photo showed the pj reflected in the pilots helmet. the pj said he could remove that with Photoshop. She told him that was not the way it worked. She sent him back to get the shot without the reflection.
She explained that there is a difference between a photograph and a Potoshopped IMAGE.
Bob
On 1/25/2014 5:25 PM, John Palcewski wrote:
The Associated Press Is Not 'Vogue,' Fired Photoshopping Photographer Learns
"Digitally altering photographs might be accepted -- expected, really -- when it comes to magazines like Vogue, but it's a big no-no when it comes to news organizations. Yet that's what one Pulitzer-winning AP photographer chose to do to a photo he took in Syria in September."
Full story here:
--
Never trust atoms..... They make up everything.
