[Leica] documentary photos thread

[kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour)]

Ted Grant wrote:
> Steve Barbour offered:
> 
>>a simple word about staged photos...
>>
>>      We live in a world where words and truth are
>>as reliable as smoke.The current "prison photos"
>>debacle help illustrate that if all we had were
>>mere words...the outrages would be a non scandal...
>>
>>....no one would believe the words. Words and
>>reports have become as suspect as politicians
>>statements.
>>
>>If photos through manipulation become unreliable
>>as truth...I believe they too will entirely lose
>>their value... I fear where this would leave us.<<<<<<<
> 
> 
> Hi Steve,
> People always believe a photograph as it stood was the truth of what it
> illustrated. It's easy for politicians to lie and today most intelligent
> humans accept that that's part of being a politician. It isn't right, but it
> get's them elected. :-(
> 
> Writing journalists can bend their stories in many fashions, some to the
> extent of lying, however when caught there's hell to pay and the writer
> looses their credibility.
> 
> But the photograph? "Why that's truthful proof!" ??????????????????
> 
> Well Ok it was that way and is 99.9999999999999% of the time unless twisted
> for propaganda. But we as photographers have always been accepted for what
> we show in our pictures, basically the way it was and how we recorded it. At
> least we always had "accepted truth" on our side.
> 
> But wrong use of PhotoShop for journalistic purpose is a huge danger of
> destroying our creditability as photojournalists and once that's gone what
> the heck can people believe what they see in print.
> 
> Advertising illustrations? Who cares what it looks like as we know it's
> created for selling a product.
> 
> But the truth of saying what's happening in a photojournalistic photograph
> and then find out it's been contrived and set-up is degrading to all of us
> who are photojournalists. Certainly who's pictures are accepted as truthful
> recordings of  real-time happenings.
> 
> If it's a compelling and meaningful photograph just don't offer it as the
> truth of what happened.
> 
> In our new book, "Women in Medicine" we have a disclaimer that none of the
> pictures have been digitally manipulated.  Sandy & I felt this necessary
> given the digi screwing around with pictures these days. Also as credibility
> for the medical profession.
> 
> It's when a supposed truthful picture is discovered to be not the truth as
> described, that our last clean image of telling the truth with our
> photographs goes right down the drain. Then we get lumped in with the liars,
> spin doctors and politicians. Heaven forbid, I'd quit before that happened!
> ted

Ted, thanks for your detailed answer that gets at 
the heart of my concerns....today we are living in 
a world of smoke and mirrors, all spun and 
twisted...I  hope that photography which seems as 
important as ever,  can maintain its 
integrity....but I am very concerned about this. 
Even the beheading was a staged act,  in response 
to photos, and it was done to be  photographed, 
then disseminated on the internet to create its 
own sense of truth,  for propaganda value.......Steve