Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/07/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> 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