Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/07/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Photoshopping for Truth? (and a sneaky real estate FSFriday)
From: dennis at hale-pohaku.com (Dennis)
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:46:08 -1000
References: <C8594DEC.342FA%chris@chriscrawfordphoto.com><C859555B.642D0%mark@rabinergroup.com> <AANLkTimVn6mRMkWrTqHN0V_8kL70df_p05Q9aQbQdD1r@mail.gmail.com>

I completely agree. When I saw the unaltered photo the impression I got 
changed.



Tina Manley wrote:
> This is too depressing.  Removing the lady altered the truth of the photo.
>  Period.  It made Obama look isolated and alone.  That was not the truth.
>  This is a very slippery slope and we're sliding down it too fast.
>
> Tina
>
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> 
> wrote:
>
>   
>>> This has nothing to do with press freedom or Stalin or Hitler. Those
>>> dictators ORDERED an unfree press to delete people from photos. There is
>>>       
>> no
>>     
>>> such control over the press in the USA or the UK and if a publication
>>>       
>> alters
>>     
>>> a photo, its because THEY chose to, not because the government ordered
>>>       
>> it.
>>     
>>> --
>>> Chris Crawford
>>> Fine Art Photography
>>> Fort Wayne, Indiana
>>> 260-424-0897
>>>       
>> And the issue might be WHY did they choose to do so in our free press.
>> And the answer in this case is I think they wanted to communicate more
>> concisely and directly what was going and and what their story was. And
>> this
>> being the reality of magazine covers conceptualization from day one to 
>> now.
>> If they distorted the meaning of what as going on I'd take issue with that
>> but that lady being there  or not being there did not change the story. It
>> just cluttered the image.
>> All they wanted was a more clean graphic.
>>
>> The other thing the editors didn't have to take out was the smell of dead
>> fish and the  sound of the wind and 3D.
>> That a photograph contains some kind of  "truth" is not an idea I'd like 
>> to
>> propagate.
>> There could have been an army of protesters just to the left simply not
>> include in the picture by the photographer. An army of trained seals.
>> A photograph is never the truth. Its ink on a piece of paper.
>> And the world as I know it does not consist of pieces of flat paper with
>> ink
>> on it. It's smell o-rama. And wide field 3d with sound.
>> Still photography is a very thin abstraction from reality.
>>
>> [Rabs]
>> Mark William Rabiner
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>   


In reply to: Message from chris at chriscrawfordphoto.com (Chris Crawford) ([Leica] Photoshopping for Truth? (and a sneaky real estate FS Friday))
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Photoshopping for Truth? (and a sneaky real estate FS Friday))
Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Photoshopping for Truth? (and a sneaky real estate FS Friday))