Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/03/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That's "throw out the TV, go to the country, eat some peaches, and look for God" At 01:31 PM 3/18/2009, you wrote: >>But what do you do about tv? > >"throw out the TV, eat some peaches, and look for God" - John Prine > >>Leo Wesson >>Photographer/Videographer >>817.733.9157 >>www.leowessson.com >> >> >>On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at >>gmail.com>wrote: >> >> > Hi Chris, anecdotally that causal connection seems commonly >> accepted. I do >> > realise that you have just provided a link and mentioned the causal >> > connection. This is not meant to be negative regarding your post. I do >> > think >> > it is an issue relevant for everyone with a digital darkroom and worthy >> > of >> > discussion. >> > This link is a practical example that we have shown our daughter. >> > http://demo.fb.se/e/girlpower/ad/retouch/index.html >> > Here this issue has been raised to an extent, with a voluntary code for >> > women's magazines especially, to follow. Another related issue is >> > minimum >> > age and weight standards for fashion models. Following media attention >> > stirring popular opinion, some successful European models have been >> > withdrawn from high profile shows here on age or weight issues. Yet we >> have >> > 13 yr olds launching successful careers from cover photographs on Teen >> > magazines. >> > Your linked article doesn't contain any actual facts or detail, as is >> > common >> > for this kind of op ed piece. I want to avoid straying into areas such >> > as the quality of media reporting, perceptions arising from advertising, >> > personal responsibility and liability. >> > I do have reservations regarding effectiveness for any legislation to >> > require disclosure on retouching. >> > >> > Here are some points that come to mind for me: >> > A meaningful disclosure on any fashion image would be complex and >> > large. I >> > don't see that as practical at all. It could easily double the size of a >> > magazine for example. >> > A generic warning (similar to a product health warning) may not be >> > effective >> > at all. It would realistically have to say that EVERY image in the >> magazine >> > has been altered. The effect of such a warning label might be, more in >> > the >> > nature of "look we are doing SOMETHING" . >> > Would the magazine just provide links where the information could be >> > obtained? Would anyone go there except people interested in the field >> > perhaps? >> > Since many magazines are international in distribution, this could >> > negate >> > any national legislation anyway, editions unaffected by such legislation >> > could be more desirable (cheaper? smaller? ). >> > What about television and movie content? Do we require disclosure when a >> > "stunt butt" stands in for the leading lady for unclothed scenes? >> > Should disclosure extend to all printed or displayed images? >> > Who sets the standards and for what contexts? >> > What would be the cost of implementation? Would there be practical >> > benefits? >> > >> > You can see how these ideas can balloon out of all proportion. >> > >> > In my opinion, this sort of issue sounds like a great idea at first >> > glance >> > but is grossly impractical to actually implement. Do you have any >> > professional insights on practical effects or implementations that you >> > are >> > aware of? Can you share any views on what you think is appropriate or >> > how >> > that causal link could be approached? >> > >> > I sometimes take photos of my children (a lot!) and their friends if it >> > is >> > a >> > party or similar. >> > I've posted probably a 1000 or more images to the list (not only those >> > subjects of course). All of those images have certainly had at least >> > some >> > modification with photoshop. >> > Here's a more dramatic example, just for purposes of discussion that >> may be >> > of interest. This is a young teen friend of my daughters. There were >> > also >> > gross problems with colour from the original processing (colour neg) and >> > prints from them. >> > The result pleased me,the subject and her family and I don't see any >> > negative impact at all. Put in another context you could argue that it >> > is >> > unrealistic, promotes unhealthy expectations, negative body image etc. I >> > see >> > it as making an attractive and positive photograph. >> > >> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ns/DLoriginal.jpg.html >> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ns/DL.jpg.html >> > A retouching disclsure would be extensive and detract from the appeal of >> > the >> > photo too. Yet it included a bw conversion with contrast, individual >> colour >> > conversion adjustments, obviously removal of skin imperfections, lines, >> > texture and luminace, eyes altered in shade, detail, sharpness, tone >> > even >> > highlight adjustments, localised focus adjustments throughout etc etc. >> > I think that the viewer can look and is well aware that the photo has >> > been >> > idealised. Similarly, surely people in general are aware that all >> > printed >> > photgraphs are subject to entensive modification before publication. >> > There >> > are millions published every year. >> > >> > >> > >> > 2009/3/18 Chris Saganich <chs2018 at med.cornell.edu> >> > >> > > Another reason I like the French. As a Public Health Professional I >> > > do >> > see >> > > a thread through image retouching, negative body image, and >> > > psychological/physical harm through the entire population. >> > > >> > > < >> > > >> > >> http://video.nytimes.com/video/playlist/opinion/op-ed/1194833176718/index.html#1194838469575 >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Leica Users Group. >> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Cheers >> > Geoff >> > 'Pick up your Leica and make the best photo you can' >> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ >> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 > >Chris Saganich MS, CPH >Senior Physicist, Office of Health Physics >Weill Medical College of Cornell University >New York Presbyterian Hospital >chs2018 at med.cornell.edu >http://intranet.med.cornell.edu/research/health_phys/ >Ph. 212.746.6964 >Fax. 212.746.4800 >Office A-0049 > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information Chris Saganich MS, CPH Senior Physicist, Office of Health Physics Weill Medical College of Cornell University New York Presbyterian Hospital chs2018 at med.cornell.edu http://intranet.med.cornell.edu/research/health_phys/ Ph. 212.746.6964 Fax. 212.746.4800 Office A-0049