[Leica] On the Up and UP

[afterswift at aol.com (afterswift@aol.com)]

I believe the NYT has a standard for journalistic veracity that prohibits 
any manipulation of an image, digital or otherwise. I suppose the 
photographer can compose and crop in the viewfinder, but not in post 
processing. There is a good reason for that, it seems to me. The editor can 
justifiably assume that the viewfinder image was dictated by the immediate 
conditions in the scene. Therefore, the photographer can not be held 
responsible for the missing information. But the editor will not tolerate 
the cold-blooded addition or removal of information.
That would misinform the reader who expects the original image. I figure 
that the reader's expectation of the real goods is the gold standard. 
 
If the photographer missed vital information in the composition, it is up to 
the editor to discover it, probably by questioning the reporter who worked 
with the photographer; or the editor can request to see additional shots of 
the same scene made at the same time if available. Ultimately, it's the 
photographer's reputation that the editor can depend on. 
 
Chances are that if a photographer presents the original negatives with the 
prints his work would carry more weight as to authenticity. I assume there 
will always be a few traditionalists who will shoot film on assignment -- or 
at least use one film camera among the digitals.
 
If anybody wants to shed their M3, M6, M7 for a few symbolic bucks, I'll 
take them off your hands. Hey, I'm using a 9 year old Dell PC Pentium II 
with Windows 2000 Pro. I'm not proud. 
 
Bob 
  
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.