Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/29

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

Subject: [Leica] film vs. digital in my brain.
From: bd at bdcolenphoto.com (B. D. Colen)
Date: Fri Sep 29 04:47:05 2006

Obviously I don't have any inside information on this, and Tina may through
friends in the area. But I still tend to think this is a case of standards
having changed and someone ignoring them. As I tell my students, it is
ironic but true that as media standards in general - in terms of what is
covered and what passes as reporting - have absolutely gone to hell over the
past25 years, and particularly over the past 15, standards/ethics/rules for
photojournalists have become far, far more stringent. What was indeed
acceptable in the darkroom and art department 25 years ago is now absolutely
unacceptable.( I remember seeing prints leave the Washington Post darkroom
headed for the art department, from which they'd return airbrushed and
otherwise touched up!) Clearly what has happened is that with the advent of
digital and the ability for any clever 10-year-old to use Photoshop to flat
out lie with photographs, newspapers have become less and less tolerant of
virtually any but the most basic contrast and sharpening manipulation.

I disagree, by the way, about how much he did or didn't manipulate the prize
winning photos - they look to me like the photoshop version of Eugene
Smith's famous Haitian madwoman. I wouldn't have taken the award from him,
but he was certainly put on notice. And if I'd been him, I would have asked
an editor before I did so much as throw a curve on an image.

All of that said, was someone out to get him? Sure looks that way. And has
the Observer gone to hell in a handbasket as Tina suggests? It would be
surprising if it had not.

B. D.


On 9/29/06 7:14 AM, "Ric Carter" <ricc@mindspring.com> wrote:

> That was my perception.
> 
> Why did they want to dump him so badly? Like I said, I sure don't see
> how it was the photos.
> 
> Ric
> 
> 
> On Sep 29, 2006, at 6:50 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
> 
>> At 11:01 PM 9/28/2006, you wrote:
>>> What was the real story there?
>>> 
>>> I sure didn't get it looking at the photo.
>>> 
>>> Ric
>> 
>> http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?
>> vnu_content_id=1002914629
>> 
>> Patrick had had awards taken away before when he increased the
>> contrast in some photos to make them more dramatic.  This time he
>> boosted the color to match what he said he remembered but didn't
>> capture when he shot into the sun.  None of the changes affected
>> the meaning of the photos.  They were all alterations that could
>> have been made in the darkroom if he had been shooting film.
>> 
>> Tina
>> 
>> Tina Manley, ASMP, NPPA
>> http://www.tinamanley.com
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from ricc at mindspring.com (Ric Carter) ([Leica] film vs. digital in my brain.)