[Leica] NPR story

[lists at mcclary.net (Harrison McClary)]

What it all boils down to is that in this day and age of easy digital 
manipulation it has been generally agreed on that removing anything from 
a photo is taboo.  This is more because of the ease with which it is 
done.  Just where do you draw the line.  Is it at the legs as in this 
photo, straightening and whitening the teeth of a mother of 5 kids for 
the cover of a national news magazine, enhancing the color of a 
defendants mug shot for dramatic effect, moving a pyramid to fit the 
cover of a magazine....just where do you say enough is enough.

One goes too far and then no one is believed any more.  So the 
"standard" is now no manipulation is allowed.  Simple and effective and 
not too hard to follow.  If it is decided that you are not supposed to 
remove the legs from a news photo of this type and someone does it, well 
then he must face the consequences of his actions.  He**  I am a 
commercial photographer now and I know this is not something one does in 
journalism.  Period.  We can discuss if this is a valid change of the 
photo or how simply being there changes things (look at Quantum Physics 
if you really want to get into this...pretty interesting stuff there!), 
but the rules say do not change the photo in photo shop by removing 
things or adding things. Period.

Phil Swango wrote:
>
> I'm having trouble with the logic.
> You can choose an angle that doesn't show the legs.
> You can crop out the legs.
> You can open your Nocti to f/1 and blur them to oblivion.
> You can ask the legs to please go away.
> But you can't 'shop out the legs.


-- 
Harrison McClary
Harrison McClary Photography
harrison@mcclary.net
http://www.mcclary.net
ImageStockSouth - Stock Photography
http://www.imagestocksouth.com
Tobacco Road: Personal Blog:
http://www.mcclary.net/blog