Digital

[kturk@fielding.mvsu.edu]

At, 07 Nov 1997 10:44:13 -0800 Patrick G. Sobalvarro wrote:

>Still, I really enjoy having a dry darkroom and I recommend >it to you. Does that trash can under the tree there bother >you?  A matter of 15 seconds' work and it's gone without a >trace.  Hmm, would this look better if flipped >horizontally?  That takes a couple of seconds.  How about
>burning in this limited area -- it's a funny-shaped mask, >but it doesn't take long to make on the screen.

Many people are concerned now about the value and validity 
of the digital darkroom. Tradition seems to be again pushed 
out of the way. Ever since photography started people have 
tried to manipulate the image by either using filters or 
employing special darkroom tricks. Digital manipulation 
delivers the darkroom to your fingertips. You can create a 
solarization or posterization in seconds without working the 
long hours in the darkroom, inhaling poisonous gases and 
dissolving your clothes in alkalines and acids. The darker 
side of digital imaging is in the ease to produce fraudulent 
evidence or to distort the truth.
  
It's easy to understand the temptation to 'improve' a  photo 
at the stroke of a few keys.
As you all remember, a photographer superimposed the head of 
TV personality Oprah Winfrey on the body of actress  
Ann-Margaret for a cover shot on TV Guide. More recently, a 
slight change in the tone of a Time cover created a big
controversy with racial consequences. To illustrate the 
sensational O.J. Simpson murder case for its June 27, 1996 
issue, Time's photo staff took his Los Angeles Police 
Department mugshot and electronically darkened it for 
artistic effect. What resulted made him look heavily bearded 
and, in the view of many, sinister. Blacks took immediate 
offense and accused the magazine of racism and of turning 
Simpson into the symbol of the stereotypical menacing black 
male. Time editors were horrified by the outcry. James R. 
Gaines, managing editor, wrote a full page apology in the 
next issue noting that the changes had been made to give the 
photo an artistic look and that, in his words, "no racial 
implication was intended."  This kind of electronic 
manipulation is rare in news magazines, given the criticism 
and the memory of these cases. Some manipulation photos used 
in more featured oriented periodicals, however.

This is nothing new in photography, it has been done for 
ages by other means, but, digital manipulation has more 
potentials to bring many ethical questions in the future.
Respectfully,

Kirksal Turk
Asst. Professor of Journalism
Miss Valley State University