Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/11/07

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Journalism, altered photo's, and other ethical debates
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 01:02:20 -0800
References: <BBD077CF.A943%eric@jphotog.com>

The picture with the maimed legless girls legs cropped out was
"softened" in my words for it's local audience by cutting bloody stumps
out. Bloody stumps just don't appear on many papers covers. I"m sure
this happens all the time. 

Is the point of the picture that a girl gets saved or a legless maimed
girl gets saved? It was decided that that the girl was maimed was not
central to the message of the picture. So it was cropped. Why does the
girl have to be mained? Becuas the photographer would have not taken the
picture in the first place as lots of people were being saved at the
time.  But cropping is OK while darkening is not? Or blurring. Or cloning?
I think when you work for a paper you go by their ethical rules unless
they go against yours. You play it the way the other photographers play
it working for that paper.
You expect them to Handle your shots the way they've handled others.

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 Eric Welch <eric@jphotog.com> (Re: [Leica] Journalism, altered photo's, and other ethical debates)