Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/02

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] fired for photoshopping
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 18:08:50 -0800
References: <BC8505FA-6567-11D7-9C7D-000393802534@mac.com>

><Snip> 
> 
> Is it better to pretend that the "camera doesn't lie" and thus pass off
> many little lies as par for the course because people don't stop to
> think critically -- risking that big ones will slip through unnoticed;
> or is it better to expose all the lies, and the way in which the camera
> does lie, but require people to exert the extra effort?
> 
> Clearly, we've chosen option #1.
> 
> M.
> 
If the INTENT of the picture is changed by printing it way dark (OJ),
funny cropping, air brushing, or Photoshopping then a lie has been told
and needs to be corrected.
I give any photo the benefit of the doubt... that it told the truth -
that's it is not somehow a distortion.

Life magazine appeared to be more air brush ink than silver but the
INTENT I think most of the time was not changed.



Mark Rabiner
Portland, Oregon USA
http://www.rabinergroup.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Martin Howard <mvhoward@mac.com> (Re: [Leica] fired for photoshopping)