Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/11/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ok we are agreeing more than I thought now I read the lower paragraph. Needed to scroll down. And actually in retrospect my logic is lacking in the example of stuff like magazines like National Geographic once they went to color many decades ago. Because it was all from slides and the photographer just handed in the original slides. Which were exposed for the highlights with the dark tones going where they will. No prints made by the photographer of anybody else the process was right from slide to printing plate. Its possible they could try to hold detail locally with some craft and art in the plate making process. But that stuff is a mystery. The NG images were all rich and full of detail. "slick". And still are today The issue of cloning Zebras near Lions I don't think is what's being discussed by Reuters here or what's being worried about.. They just want to not get sued for people claiming their image they bought from them is not "real". As that's the big buzz on the time on the chat lists. They want all their contributors acting like the guys with the flashes shooting the celebs going down the red carpets. Shoot em and get then on the wire five minutes later.. That keeps the lawyers happy. If they only knew the intensive air brushing that was done to every single shot in the golden age of LIFE and LOOK. On 11/19/15 9:58 PM, "Peter Klein" <boulanger.croissant at gmail.com> wrote: > Dodging and burning are usually not a dishonest altering reality. They are a > way of making the photo better resemble what the human eye saw, with > its ability to scan and see both highlights and shadows. They have been > an important tool in photography for over a century. I don't think > that option should be taken away from photographers and editors. Having a > RAW option is important for high-contrast situations--such as > low-latitude deserts in bright daylight. Regrettably, there are going to be a > lot more news photos coming from such locations. Also, with all of the mixed > light sources photographers have to deal with, being able to use different > white balance settings on different part of the photo is important. Mark > mentions National Geographic. Well, faked wildlife photos have caused some > scandals recently. And NG is now owned by Rupert Murdoch, (supposedly) a news > guy. So this policy could very well be adopted by National Geographic one of > these days. I just hope that magazine and "editorial" photographers don't end > up having this policy shoved down their throats as well. --Peter On Thu, Nov > 19, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.co -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/