Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/07/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I would re frame the argument as one of justice for the individuals denial of existence in that moment of time rather then an alteration of reality. I think we all agree that reality doesn't have a fixed existence but people do. One can't have a phoney concept of reality unless reality can be shown to be a predicate function. In the film Platoon when the bad guy said, "I am reality", we can't take him to be anything but a psychopath. So, using an argument about reality isn't appropriate, rather there is a fundamental injustice be committed to those eliminated from the moment, an existential homocide. At 11:19 AM 7/20/2010, you wrote: >"In adherence with our zero tolerance policy on photo manipulation" > >It's living in a fool's paradise or lying to the clientele or having >NO concept of what photos are > >But, we've had this discussion many times without conclusion -- mot >recently with an identical problem--someone removed from the picture > >It's all about some phoney concept of reality that does not in reality exist > >they're pictures, not reality, but impressions of it rendered by >people with opinions > >The only way to avoid that is to place the viewer at the point of >action, in which case you don't need the photographer > >ric > > > > > > >On Jul 20, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Tina Manley wrote: > > > > > So where do you draw the line? > > > > > http://pdnedu.blogs.com/pdn_pulse/2010/07/getty-photographer-fired-over-altered-golf-photo.html > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information