Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/03/18

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

Subject: [Leica] French to legislate image retouching
From: chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich)
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:31:35 -0400
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20090317101204.0298cbd8@pop.med.cornell.edu> <36172e5a0903171628j232e37d7k67103d661bc3f00d@mail.gmail.com> <3e7573d40903180646t311945fcw5d2f5ec2fb95c344@mail.gmail.com>

>
>
>But what do you do about tv?

"throw out the TV, eat some peaches, and look for God" - John Prine

>Leo Wesson
>Photographer/Videographer
>817.733.9157
>www.leowessson.com
>
>
>On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at 
>gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi Chris, anecdotally that causal connection seems commonly accepted.  I 
> > do
> > realise that you have just provided a link and mentioned the causal
> > connection. This is not meant to be negative regarding your post. I do
> > think
> > it is an issue relevant for everyone with a digital darkroom and worthy 
> > of
> > discussion.
> > This link is a practical example that we have shown our daughter.
> > http://demo.fb.se/e/girlpower/ad/retouch/index.html
> > Here this issue has been raised to an extent, with a voluntary code for
> > women's magazines especially, to follow. Another related issue is minimum
> > age and weight standards for fashion models. Following media attention
> > stirring popular opinion, some successful European models have been
> > withdrawn from high profile shows here on age or weight issues. Yet we 
> > have
> > 13 yr olds launching successful careers from cover photographs on Teen
> > magazines.
> > Your linked article doesn't contain any actual facts or detail, as is
> > common
> > for this kind of op ed piece. I want to avoid straying into areas such
> > as the quality of media reporting, perceptions arising from advertising,
> > personal responsibility and liability.
> > I do have reservations regarding effectiveness for any legislation to
> > require disclosure on retouching.
> >
> > Here are some points that come to mind for me:
> > A meaningful disclosure on any fashion image would be complex and large. 
> > I
> > don't see that as practical at all. It could easily double the size of a
> > magazine for example.
> > A generic warning (similar to a product health warning) may not be
> > effective
> > at all. It would realistically have to say that EVERY image in the 
> > magazine
> > has been altered. The effect of such a warning label might be, more in 
> > the
> > nature of "look we are doing SOMETHING" .
> > Would the magazine just provide links where the information could be
> > obtained? Would anyone go there except people interested in the field
> > perhaps?
> > Since many magazines are international in distribution, this could negate
> > any national legislation anyway, editions unaffected by such legislation
> > could be more desirable (cheaper? smaller? ).
> > What about television and movie content? Do we require disclosure when a
> > "stunt butt" stands in for the leading lady for unclothed scenes?
> > Should disclosure extend to all printed or displayed images?
> >  Who sets the standards and for what contexts?
> > What would be the cost of implementation? Would there be practical
> > benefits?
> >
> > You can see how these ideas can balloon out of all proportion.
> >
> > In my opinion, this sort of issue sounds like a great idea at first 
> > glance
> > but is grossly impractical to actually implement. Do you have any
> > professional insights on practical effects or implementations that you 
> > are
> > aware of? Can you share any views on what you think is appropriate or how
> > that causal link could be approached?
> >
> > I sometimes take photos of my children (a lot!) and their friends if it 
> > is
> > a
> > party or similar.
> > I've posted probably a 1000 or more images to the list (not only those
> > subjects of course). All of those images have certainly had at least some
> > modification with photoshop.
> > Here's a more dramatic example, just for purposes of discussion that may 
> > be
> > of interest. This is a young teen friend of my daughters. There were also
> > gross problems with colour from the original processing (colour neg) and
> > prints from them.
> > The result pleased me,the subject and her family  and I don't see any
> > negative impact at all. Put in another context you could argue that it is
> > unrealistic, promotes unhealthy expectations, negative body image etc. I
> > see
> > it as making an attractive and positive photograph.
> >
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ns/DLoriginal.jpg.html
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ns/DL.jpg.html
> > A retouching disclsure would be extensive and detract from the appeal of
> > the
> > photo too. Yet it included a bw conversion with contrast, individual 
> > colour
> > conversion adjustments, obviously removal of skin imperfections, lines,
> > texture and luminace, eyes altered in shade, detail, sharpness, tone even
> > highlight adjustments, localised focus adjustments throughout etc etc.
> > I think that the viewer can look and is well aware that the photo has 
> > been
> > idealised. Similarly, surely people in general are aware that all printed
> > photgraphs are subject to entensive modification before publication. 
> > There
> > are millions published every year.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2009/3/18 Chris Saganich <chs2018 at med.cornell.edu>
> >
> > > Another reason I like the French.  As a Public Health Professional I do
> > see
> > > a thread through image retouching, negative body image, and
> > > psychological/physical harm through the entire population.
> > >
> > > <
> > >
> > 
> http://video.nytimes.com/video/playlist/opinion/op-ed/1194833176718/index.html#1194838469575
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Leica Users Group.
> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Geoff
> > 'Pick up your Leica and make the best photo you can'
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/
> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

Chris Saganich MS, CPH
Senior Physicist, Office of Health Physics
Weill Medical College of Cornell University
New York Presbyterian Hospital
chs2018 at med.cornell.edu
http://intranet.med.cornell.edu/research/health_phys/
Ph. 212.746.6964
Fax. 212.746.4800
Office A-0049


Replies: Reply from philippe.amard at tele2.fr (Philippe AMARD) ([Leica] French to legislate image retouching)
In reply to: Message from chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich) ([Leica] French to legislate image retouching)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] French to legislate image retouching)
Message from leowesson at gmail.com (leo wesson) ([Leica] French to legislate image retouching)