Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Havn't we beat this subject in to the ground deep enough????? You guys are
re-hashing the same argument over and over and over....
ENOUGH!!!
Gene
"Hagerman, Douglas"
<Douglas.Hagerman@hp.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent by: cc:
owner-leica-users@mejac.palo Subject: [Leica] manipulated photos
-alto.ca.us
04/04/2003 01:34 PM
Please respond to
leica-users
Re manipulated photos, everybody has seen those super-long telephoto
pictures accompanying stories like "new airport runway threatens nearby
homes," the ones that make it look like the airplane wheels are brushing
the suburban house. So if you select a lens in order to change the emphasis
of your photo, is that against the rules? Perhaps photojournalists should
only be allowed 35 or 50mm lenses, to eliminate this dimension of
distortion!
Realistically, the editor needs to decide what he wants to publish, and
then make sure his reporters know the rules. If the reporter breaks the
rules then he (or she) is open to termination.
For example, National Geographic didn't seem to have a problem moving
pyramids around a few years ago...and whether that was just to make a point
or not is irrelevant: The editor gets to decide what he thinks is
appropriate.
Doug.
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html