Fri
Aug 11 2006
08:27 pm

This week's incidents of photo-doctoring of pictures from Lebanon that have been published by some news organizations have provoked a good deal of outrage and hand-wringing.

So they should.

Changing a photograph in a way that alters its meaning -- even if only incidentally -- is not a good thing for journalists or journalism. We have been reading about this sort of thing far too much these days, and unfortunately, we will probably continue to hear about such behavior.

But in an article in Slate ("Don't Believe What You See in the Papers"), Jim Lewis has some valuable perspective on how we view photography. A photograph has power because we believe it; we think that if we had been standing beside the photographer when it was taken, we would have seen the same thing. That's not true, and Lewis does a good job of reminding us of that fact.

Lewis also links to a "rogue's gallery" of digital manipulation put together by Dartmouth's Haney Farid that reminds us that this sort of thing happens on a regular basis.

F-Stop's picture

I agree. The Reuters

I agree.

The Reuters photograph that showed up earlier this week was clearly altered, and it kind of made me sick to see that.

More and more pro level cameras are now coming equiped or able to work with GPS devices. Of course that doesn't prevent the final photo from becoming altered, but it's still a neat tool.

The only real alterations i'd be comfortable with in a journelistic image is cropping the image to make it fit the requirements of the space it needs to fill. I don't even like the idea of adjusting levels in PS, saturation or hue changes, much less adding content to a photograph.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Lost Medicaid Funding

    To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

    Search and Archives