RE: [Leica] Journalism, altered photo's, and other ethical debates

[Tim Atherton <tim@KairosPhoto.com>]

> I interpreted "it" (in "it's baloney and nothing more than a sort of
> politically correct or puritan approach to photojournalism") to
> be referring
> to the attempt to censure any manipulation beyond harmless burning or
> dodging.   That is, Tim doesn't think that there should be that
> restriction
> on manipulating an image, or, it sounds like,  any restriction.   Tim, is
> that the correct reading of what you said?

Not quite (your term "harmless burning or dodging" is a little confusing)

I was saying that the current attempts to censure what have until now been
the entirely acceptable and traditional practices within photojournalism of
standard dodging, burning and other darkroom tools (often done for aesthetic
purposes, but not done to change the editorial content of the image) is
"baloney and nothing more than a sort of politically correct or puritan
approach to photojournalism"

In the realm of photojournalism I have never said there should be no
restriction on manipulating an image (documentary photography is an entirely
different matter).

My strong reaction is towards those who are taking what have, until now been
entirely acceptable ways to visually/aesthetically improve the
photojournalistic image (often compensating for the technical shortcomings
of the film process etc) and all of a sudden saying "in the new digital age
we are afraid of people accusing us of manipulating photographs - therefore,
basically NO post-production manipulation of any kind will be allowed" -
which is where it is headed, if it's not there already. That, to my way of
looking at it is baloney...

It is people not being able to differentiate between doing something which
visually enhances the image but doesn't effect the meaning or content
(dodging in skies, burning shadows - or even as mundane as using a
polarizing or red filter and spotting for dust) and doing something which
alters the editorial or journalistic meaning of the photograph (moving
fearful looking Iraqi from one frame into another with menacing looking
British soldier)

There seems to be an inability to differentiate between these two (or to
think that photographers can differentiate between the two) and the move now
is to throw the baby out with the bathwater by basically banning the former
in order to prevent the latter - which is futile.

tim

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html