Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Frank Filippone wrote: > BTW, if you actually saw the images ( LA Times today, page A6) you > would > notice that the actual changes made did not change the intent or > message of > the photo. It improved the image. That, of course, is entirely beside the point. The point is that the general public believe that the camera doesn't lie (of course, it lies all the time -- but that's beside the point ;) In some sense, this raises a very interesting dilemma (if you're the kind of person who likes dilemmas, that is. If not, just hit "DELETE"). Is it better to pretend that the "camera doesn't lie" and thus pass off many little lies as par for the course because people don't stop to think critically -- risking that big ones will slip through unnoticed; or is it better to expose all the lies, and the way in which the camera does lie, but require people to exert the extra effort? Clearly, we've chosen option #1. M. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html