Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/08/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]um, this is nothing new. I have several books about that expedition, including the one by shackelton, and several of them do say that the photo of the men being "rescued" is really the one taken when the boat left (or is it the other way around? I can never remember). Nobody is sure why hurley felt a need to do it, except perhaps to meet the demand for the dramatic moment. whatever. I don't see this taking away a bit from his achievement of (a) getting some of the most amazing photos taken under unimaginable trying circumstances and (b) coming home alive. photography was still in its infancy then, remember, and the line between art and photography was blurry. They didn't have the "thou shalt not manipulate" ethic we have now in journalism. They used the tool to portray what happened, and sometimes you have to change the image to convey the feeling. not sure why someone feels a need to bring this out again, except it is the final survivor talking, but he has nothing new to say and I'm very disappointed the Guardian, generally competent, chose to forget to say that. c trentelman In a message dated 8/22/04 5:54:53 AM, lug-request@leica-users.org writes: > > This from the London Guardian online: > > ? > http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/news/story/0,11711,1288286,00.html > > ?? Claims Shakleton's expedition photographes were faked. > > --Bill >