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: grdalton at hotmail.com (Gary Dalton)
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:33:06 -0700
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20090317101204.0298cbd8@pop.med.cornell.edu> <36172e5a0903171628j232e37d7k67103d661bc3f00d@mail.gmail.com> <3e7573d40903180646t311945fcw5d2f5ec2fb95c344@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20090318152259.01463068@pop.med.cornell.edu>

All this talk about peaches and the country prompts me to offer a 
revision....

 "throw out the TV, go to the country, eat some peaches, listen to Lynnard 
Skynnard and look for God"



> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:23:45 -0400
> To: lug at leica-users.org
> From: chs2018 at med.cornell.edu
> Subject: Re: [Leica] French to legislate image retouching
> 
> That's "throw out the TV, go to the country, eat some peaches, and look 
> for 
> God"
> 
> At 01:31 PM 3/18/2009, you wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> >>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 withdrawn from high profile shows here on age or weight issues.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
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Life without walls.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_032009


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)
Message from chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich) ([Leica] French to legislate image retouching)