John Morrison Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Interesting to see how keen some of the news media still are about 'truth' in imagery... http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/photography-blog/2014/jan/23/associated-press-narciso-contreras-syria-photojournalism#_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brooks Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 How about the politician that the media does not like? The media go through a shoot and edit out hundreds of images that make the politician look good. They select the one picture that makes the politician look bad. Look how ugly the politician looks when he clears his throat. Photographer gets rewarded. Where is the truth in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 "news media" . . . "truth" . . . in the same sentence . . . hmmm, an interesting concept to say the least. dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 How about the politician that the media does not like? The media go through a shoot and edit out hundreds of images that make the politician look good. They select the one picture that makes the politician look bad. Look how ugly the politician looks when he clears his throat. Photographer gets rewarded. Where is the truth in that? The media always manipulates by what they choose to write and what photos they pick. But at least the photo is a true photo. And any alterations should be up to the photo editor, not the photographer, that way his/hers reputation would always be untarnished. You could get down to what the photographer chose to take as opposed to what he/she didn't. A line has to be drawn somewhere and I think that is the proper line. Cropping would be no different than zooming in and out. And then as shown, maybe people would be questioning whether an award winning photo was real or had been manipulated. Analyzing the media, is a whole new subject. In news stories, all facts must be true, although some may be left out to slant the story a certain way. But the facts can't be altered, no matter how trivial. My cousin was a reporter at the Toronto Sun, and accidentally reported the wrong people dead from a car accident. It wasn't noticed until the paper had already gone to press. Over 400,00 papers had to be destroyed and new plates shot. He was suspended for a week as was his editor, who should have noticed the error. He came close to being fired. (Of course this isn't a trivial example) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 And we choose how we depict a scene by the angle we choose, the location and the framing... The edit starts before we press the button .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 "news media" . . . "truth" . . . in the same sentence . . . hmmm, an interesting concept to say the least. dd Those of working for news agencies would take exception to that comment,.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 "news media" . . . "truth" . . . in the same sentence . . . hmmm, an interesting concept to say the least. dd Those of working for news agencies would take exception to that comment,.... And many of us who live in a country that is bombarded daily by the virtual-monopoly of the Murdoch press obviously hold a very different opinion and would take exception to that exception . . . there are any number of solid examples I could give, but hey, OT and it is just an opinion after all. dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 And many of us who live in a country that is bombarded daily by the virtual-monopoly of the Murdoch press obviously hold a very different opinion and would take exception to that exception . . . there are any number of solid examples I could give, but hey, OT and it is just an opinion after all. dd Well it is and is not OT.. The point is we need to believe what we see in images in the media is true and substantiated, unlike what we often see on twitter... all of the NEWS photographer I know would not manipulate an image like that (and as the article says, it is a sackable offence).... art and stock of course, but an image submitted as news, no... hey we have even now started captioning images "this image has been converted to monochrome" when submitting same.. just so it's clear... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 And many of us who live in a country that is bombarded daily by the virtual-monopoly of the Murdoch press obviously hold a very different opinion and would take exception to that exception . . . there are any number of solid examples I could give, but hey, OT and it is just an opinion after all. dd Well it is and is not OT.. The point is we need to believe what we see in images in the media is true and substantiated, unlike what we often see on twitter... all of the NEWS photographer I know would not manipulate an image like that (and as the article says, it is a sackable offence).... art and stock of course, but an image submitted as news, no... hey we have even now started captioning images "this image has been converted to monochrome" when submitting same.. just so it's clear... Julie, I commented on the media in general, not photographers/photography in particular. We do indeed need to believe in what we see in an image, I totally agree and support all organisations that take that code seriously, but unfortunately I also harbour the belief that we need to believe what we see reported in the meda, and unfortunately we are too often let down in that regard. When I read (rarely in mainstream media I might add) that newspaper and tv journalists are amongst the least trusted professions, I assume I'm not alone in that belief. That was the basis of my comment. dd dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidC Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Mr Dingo throws a little soot into this matter - the way that newspapers choose to present the news is biased in whatever way their proprietors desire - just have a look at the front page of the Daily Star (UK) if you must, who consider that a TV "Reality" programme is all that matters in the world - the manipulation is by content and placement. However Narciso knew the rules on image manipulation, but chose to remove an offending artifact (don't know why he bothered the image was fine, and the 'camera' detracted nothing). I'd far rather have the line that must not be crossed than allow wishy-washy interpretations of what can - and cannot be done. ....and another thing Mr Dingo, your tirade against the Murdoch empire fails to reveal the the fact that your boy was home grown - albeit that he has since had a couple of nationality changes for convenience since you exported him. I feel that you should take some personal responsibility for his shortcomings....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Several decades ago, when I was young and starting out as a magazine photographer, I had an editor who told me, "Everyone tells the truth as they believe the truth to be." While I do think that it was a mistake for the AP photographer to remove the item from the image, I also believe that people in general are naive when it comes to images that are published. Those old enough to remember LIFE magazine will remember images that were setup or showed the result of the situation or subject being directed or manipulated by the photographer. There are many iconic publications that are still publishing that feature news images that are manipulated is one way or another, for that matter I would add news stories as well. That is why I read the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times everyday. I do also think that it is sad and also bad for "Journalism" that too many people are involved with print and broadcast journalism who are not trained in journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 ... I do also think that it is sad and also bad for "Journalism" that too many people are involved with print and broadcast journalism who are not trained in journalism. Which is why crowd sourced journalism is such a misnomer! I may not be formally trained in journalism but I have studied enough over several decades and understand: the need for fact checking, ethics, legal implications etc of journalism. I describe myself as a photographer and writer, not a journalist even if some of what I do would be considered by most to be journalism. Journalist is a bit like engineer (highly qualified at post graduate level, not just a skilled fitter or machinist) it has been downgraded to a catch-all title in many minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Mr Dingo throws a little soot into this matter - the way that newspapers choose to present the news is biased in whatever way their proprietors desire - just have a look at the front page of the Daily Star (UK) if you must, who consider that a TV "Reality" programme is all that matters in the world - the manipulation is by content and placement. However Narciso knew the rules on image manipulation, but chose to remove an offending artifact (don't know why he bothered the image was fine, and the 'camera' detracted nothing). I'd far rather have the line that must not be crossed than allow wishy-washy interpretations of what can - and cannot be done. ....and another thing Mr Dingo, your tirade against the Murdoch empire fails to reveal the the fact that your boy was home grown - albeit that he has since had a couple of nationality changes for convenience since you exported him. I feel that you should take some personal responsibility for his shortcomings....... :-) I acknowledge daily the origin of Mr Murdoch (although here in the West we don't necessarily agree that being born in Melbourne necessarily means a lot) , just as I acknowledge of late the origin of the current international LaCrosse side touring Oz . . . . . . consequently I have an abundant supply of hair-shirts, but I mostly draw the line at self-flagellation. It's ironic in a way, Australians in general are always looking for the most tenuous link to claim someone as Australian (much to the bemusement of our New Zealand cousins), but in the case of the most successful (business-wise only I add quickly) we strive for the exact opposite :-) dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidC Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Mr Dingo throws a little soot into this matter - the way that newspapers choose to present the news is biased in whatever way their proprietors desire - just have a look at the front page of the Daily Star (UK) if you must, who consider that a TV "Reality" programme is all that matters in the world - the manipulation is by content and placement. However Narciso knew the rules on image manipulation, but chose to remove an offending artifact (don't know why he bothered the image was fine, and the 'camera' detracted nothing). I'd far rather have the line that must not be crossed than allow wishy-washy interpretations of what can - and cannot be done. ....and another thing Mr Dingo, your tirade against the Murdoch empire fails to reveal the the fact that your boy was home grown - albeit that he has since had a couple of nationality changes for convenience since you exported him. I feel that you should take some personal responsibility for his shortcomings....... :-) I acknowledge daily the origin of Mr Murdoch (although here in the West we don't necessarily agree that being born in Melbourne necessarily means a lot) , just as I acknowledge of late the origin of the current international LaCrosse side touring Oz . . . . . . consequently I have an abundant supply of hair-shirts, but I mostly draw the line at self-flagellation. It's ironic in a way, Australians in general are always looking for the most tenuous link to claim someone as Australian (much to the bemusement of our New Zealand cousins), but in the case of the most successful (business-wise only I add quickly) we strive for the exact opposite :-) dd You know full well that the Alamy moderators have banned all mention of the England Cricket team because it causes such distress in the old country - and any attempt to deny the hero status of the Dirty Digger down there will be met with derision - we know you really love him..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Morrison Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 You know full well that the Alamy moderators have banned all mention of the England Cricket team because it causes such distress in the old country - and any attempt to deny the hero status of the Dirty Digger down there will be met with derision - we know you really love him..... The women's cricket team, on the other hand, is doing rather well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 You know full well that the Alamy moderators have banned all mention of the England Cricket team because it causes such distress in the old country - and any attempt to deny the hero status of the Dirty Digger down there will be met with derision - we know you really love him..... The women's cricket team, on the other hand, is doing rather well... . . . exceptionally well, and all credit to them. dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Endicott Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Several decades ago, when I was young and starting out as a magazine photographer, I had an editor who told me, "Everyone tells the truth as they believe the truth to be." While I do think that it was a mistake for the AP photographer to remove the item from the image, I also believe that people in general are naive when it comes to images that are published. Those old enough to remember LIFE magazine will remember images that were setup or showed the result of the situation or subject being directed or manipulated by the photographer. There are many iconic publications that are still publishing that feature news images that are manipulated is one way or another, for that matter I would add news stories as well. That is why I read the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times everyday. I do also think that it is sad and also bad for "Journalism" that too many people are involved with print and broadcast journalism who are not trained in journalism. This is absolute truth and I can cite many examples. I was covering an event this afternoon and I saw this happen - a news photographer was posing children in a favorable manner (to him) as to give him sellable images. I saw the children from a distance and didn't realize it was happening until I approached to get a better angle - at which point I walked away. It's fine if it's a model shoot, not so good if it's a newsworthy event. I have also had issues with editors. As a news photographer, we choose to shoot what happens...not what an editor desires from an event (that doesn't actually happen). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulstw Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 And we choose how we depict a scene by the angle we choose, the location and the framing... The edit starts before we press the button .... This in a nutshell. Couldn't have put it better myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickfly Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 I remember seeing pictures a few years back from I think the Lebanon where the photographer must have carried around kids soft toys, as every rubble strewn road or bombed house had a single kids toy in view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheila Smart Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 I agree with DD that Aussies like to claim Kiwis (bless 'em) when they become famous and its rarely reciprocated but at least the Aussie cricket team is more or less Australian unlike the English cricket team: Eoin Morgan - Irish Boyd Rankin - Irish Kevin Pieterson - South African Jonathan Trott - South African Matt Prior - South African Ben Stokes - Kiwi Nuff said (and wait for the sledging!) Sheila (ex-Pom) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 As a matter of fact Boyd Rankin is an Ulsterman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidC Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 OK Mr Dingo and Sheila - let's hear it for the Ladies - I understand that a rather severe operation is planned for a number of members of the current England Lacrosse Squad who were mistakenly sent down under with cricket bats........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Morrison Posted January 29, 2014 Author Share Posted January 29, 2014 OK Mr Dingo and Sheila - let's hear it for the Ladies - Yes, the women have retained the Ashes... on foreign soil. Even the men seem assured of the silver medal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 OK Mr Dingo and Sheila - let's hear it for the Ladies - I understand that a rather severe operation is planned for a number of members of the current England Lacrosse Squad who were mistakenly sent down under with cricket bats........ ?? Hang on, aren't we banned from talking about . . . ummm . . . oh . . . hang on . . . ahhh, I get it, you mean the real England ladies team . . . yes, absolutely, as I've commented previously, top effort by the England Womens' Cricket Team. Retained the Women's Ashes in a canter. Apparently there's talk of a push for an iinnovative swap deal being discussed behind closed doors in time for some tour or other to the West Indies . . . dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 OK Mr Dingo and Sheila - let's hear it for the Ladies - Yes, the women have retained the Ashes... on foreign soil. Even the men seem assured of the silver medal... The men indeed have earned themselves a Silver medal . . . mind you, they only beat third place by one win (so far, still two games to go), so it was very close ;-) dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.