Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/04/17

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

Subject: [Leica] integrity ?
From: images at comporium.net (Tina Manley)
Date: Tue Apr 17 17:39:26 2007

At 07:17 PM 4/17/2007, you wrote:
>I will have to spend some time pondering if removing a distraction 
>from a photo that does not alter the truthfulness of the image is 
>wrong.  A removed set of stray legs or a telephone wire does not 
>seem to me as a way of changing the truth.  Something to think about 
>for awhile....

An interesting article about truth in photographs:

http://zonezero.com/magazine/articles/mraz/mraz01.html

What do you think?  Does previsualization mean that the photograph 
was manipulated subconsciously?  I don't think so. I might imagine a 
photo that I would like to take of a family in Central America, but 
that would only mean that I would only look for situations to take 
that photo.  I would never move people into position or change 
circumstances to make the photo happen when it wouldn't have without 
my being there.  Moving people into position or suggesting situations 
or adding lights or manipulating photographs in the darkroom goes way 
beyond previsualization, to me, and would not be acceptable for 
documentary or news photographs.  I think many so-called documentary 
photographs today should be reclassified as art photographs if the 
situations were manipulated or directed by the photographer.  That is 
not documentary or news photography.

Just my 2 cents.

Tina

Tina Manley, ASMP, NPPA
http://www.tinamanley.com 


Replies: Reply from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson) ([Leica] integrity ?)
Reply from ricc at mindspring.com (Ric Carter) ([Leica] integrity ?)
Reply from lug at steveunsworth.co.uk (Steve Unsworth) ([Leica] integrity ?)