Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On May 12, 2004, at 3:01 PM, B. D. Colen wrote: > NOT TRUE. > > IF it was faked - and based on the present evidence, I believe it was > real - but IF it was fake, then he indeed disguised it as something - > he > disguised it as a photograph of a soldier who had just been shot, dying > in combat. Period. > > Capa was on assignment, to shoot the war in Spain. And that is what he > shot. He was not just taking "pictures" - he was a journalist with a > camera. And thus to submit a faked photo is to submit a lie. > > What is so complicated about that? As a piece of journalism - something to run in the paper, to inform people about a specific event or situation - maybe it would be a failure. But today, or even then - it wasn't a photograph about a specific man dying. It wasn't evidence. I think there's a problem in equating this, as someone has noted, with journalism that's meant to act as evidence - faked abuse photos or the photoshopped Kerry-Fonda photos. If Capa's photo was supposed to illustrate something specific about which it lied, then I'd agree with you. But as I see it, the photo does nothing of the sort. MP