Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Alf - there is a difference between a photo-journalist that is doing > bread-butter photography* to earn a living and the artist that does > art for arts sake and doesn't care a hoot if his work sells or not. > Marvin >Are you sure, that it justifies to manipulate data in clinical trials (e.g. >drugs in cancer, aids, or heart disease management), just because I do it >for living (also)? > Alf Alf, There is a huge difference between photos done for news reporting, photos done as fine art, and photos used purely as a illustrations. An example: I'm working on a project now, where I am photographing tools for reparing jet engines, for a marketing brochure. Some of these tools are used ones, because new ones are not available to be photographed. I'm scanning the transparencies and then taking off labels and removing the dings and scratches on them. The final result is to used as an illustration. It is not a documentary photo of a particular tool in a particular condition. It is merely an illustration showing what the tool looks like. Nobody cares if the original tool had grease or inventory stickers on it, and nobody cares if this photo was cropped or manipulated. All that matters is that it shows the form of the tool in a pleasing manner, and does not misrepresent what a new tool looks like. There is nothing dishonest about this. The uses for photographs cover a huge range. If I was doing the same sort of work on a news photo, I would consider that unethical. - - Paul