Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 22 Jan 2014 (Wednesday) 17:09
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

AP bans photographer.

 
larrycumba
Senior Member
Avatar
311 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Jan 22, 2014 17:09 |  #1

http://news.yahoo.com …er-altered-221938001.html (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Brain ­ Mechanic
Goldmember
Avatar
3,526 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Apr 2010
     
Jan 22, 2014 17:20 |  #2
bannedPermanent ban

How that minor alteration changed the story the pic is projecting? Why I get the feeling there is more behind this story?


Gear: a toothed wheel :p
"To be of good quality, you have to excuse yourself from the presence of shallow and callow minded individuals" Michael Bassey Johnson
--Oscar--
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_d
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,489 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 698
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jan 22, 2014 17:23 |  #3

Brain Mechanic wrote in post #16627852 (external link)
How that minor alteration changed the story the pic is projecting?

It didn't, but he broke a rule every photojournalist should know.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,171 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 50
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Jan 22, 2014 18:00 |  #4

Brain Mechanic wrote in post #16627852 (external link)
How that minor alteration changed the story the pic is projecting? Why I get the feeling there is more behind this story?

To be honest, the second image fits with the story that this is a shot of a rebel fighter ducking for cover under fire. The first shot however, with another camera in shot, does give an impression that it is a setup situation for a number of photographers and that the guy is possibly doing this for the cameras.

Now, I have no reason to disbelieve that the guy is truly under fire, but the alteration DOES change reality and the perception of the situation. It is a hard and fast rule that you DO NOT clone ANYTHING in or out of news photographs. If you start allowing grey areas where some things can be removed, if they don't change things "too much", it starts causing arguments about "well, if he can do that, why can't I do this" and soon lowers the believability of all press images.

There are no exceptions to the rule, you can't bend it "a bit" because it doesn't make a big difference. You are there to record the reality of the situation, not a cleaned up version of reality because it makes a better image compositionally.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RichSoansPhotos
Cream of the Crop
5,981 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
     
Jan 22, 2014 18:53 |  #5
bannedPermanent ban

Brain Mechanic wrote in post #16627852 (external link)
How that minor alteration changed the story the pic is projecting? Why I get the feeling there is more behind this story?

What other photos has that photographer altered? Could be countless of photos. Do you realise the dangers of altering photos can do in regards to photojournalism? Wars have been started over a dodgy dossier, if photographers are going to alter images, that could accidentally cause problems. Please don't say I'm over-reacting, wars are serious things




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ltdave
it looks like im post #19,016
3,887 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 3064
Joined Apr 2012
Location: the farthest point east in michigan
     
Jan 22, 2014 20:46 |  #6

sandpiper wrote in post #16627932 (external link)
...You are there to record the reality of the situation, not a cleaned up version of reality because it makes a better image compositionally.

so what youre saying is the image should be sent straight out of camera? no photo image has ever been cropped or exposure/contrast/whit​e balance corrected?

this is an 'unbendable' rule?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,598 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 1056
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
     
Jan 22, 2014 20:54 |  #7
bannedPermanent ban

As far as AP is concerned it is unbendable. I agree with their decision. Cropping can be done in camera (framing/reframing): that is not a problem, nor is it basic image adjustments (contrast, exposure, WB to a point), it's cloning that is the issue.


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,867 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Likes: 1126
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Jan 22, 2014 21:54 as a reply to  @ Alveric's post |  #8

The craziest thing is that the AP actually thinks that anything journalists report is actually 'reality'.

Not that I'm saying they should allow cloning or similar manipulation, but the tone suggests there is no way there could be someone holding a beer behind the photog, just because the reporter says it is a photo of someone 'ducking for cover'.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 35 f2 IS, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_d
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,489 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 698
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jan 22, 2014 22:16 |  #9

Alveric wrote in post #16628401 (external link)
As far as AP is concerned it is unbendable. I agree with their decision. Cropping can be done in camera (framing/reframing): that is not a problem, nor is it basic image adjustments (contrast, exposure, WB to a point), it's cloning that is the issue.

Seems like such a silly thing. You're OK to take a step forward, use a longer lens, or re-aim the camera before pushing the shutter button, but slice a column or row of pixels off afterward and you've violated the Prime Directive.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,472 posts
Gallery: 246 photos
Best ofs: 12
Likes: 4298
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Chula Vista, CA
     
Jan 22, 2014 22:36 |  #10

Ltdave wrote in post #16628390 (external link)
so what youre saying is the image should be sent straight out of camera? no photo image has ever been cropped or exposure/contrast/whit​e balance corrected?

this is an 'unbendable' rule?

You can't remove things from an image or add to an image. Pretty simply really.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
karobinson
Goldmember
Avatar
1,236 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 36
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Alaska
     
Jan 22, 2014 22:42 |  #11

:lol:

Scatterbrained wrote in post #16628628 (external link)
You can't remove things from an image or add to an image. Pretty simply really.

+1


Ann Robinson:)
My Gear: bunch of stuff;....some I love ... some I hate ... some I can't live without..loving my 5d3...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
olafs ­ osh
I am a nice and fluffy dude
Avatar
1,933 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 647
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Latvia and Lithuania
     
Jan 23, 2014 04:01 |  #12

I cannot even believe, that some people even debating over this stuff. Documentary and journalism comes first and alterations cannot be allowed [not talking here about shadows, blacks and exposure]. Gosh...


- Olafs Osh
fb (external link) | instagram (external link) | YT (external link)|OLAFSOSH.COM (external link)|
Give us "Street Photography" sub-forum in P.O.T.N. !

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,171 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 50
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Jan 23, 2014 08:36 |  #13

Ltdave wrote in post #16628390 (external link)
so what youre saying is the image should be sent straight out of camera? no photo image has ever been cropped or exposure/contrast/whit​e balance corrected?

this is an 'unbendable' rule?

That isn't what I said at all. You can crop the image (the newspapers usually will anyway to fit the column format when they layout the page) and you can correct the exposure, WB etc. Nobody has said that you can't.

What HAS been said is that you cannot use cloning techniques to remove things from the scene that are "inconvenient", or add in other items, simply because it makes a better photograph.

If you can't see a difference between correcting exposure or WB, and physically removing inconvenient items from the scene, and therefore altering the reality, then you won't understand. The rule of no cloning is unbendable, it has to be, if you start allowing some things to be removed or added, then who draws a line at WHAT is permissible to remove or add.

Framing the shot to avoid the other camera in the first place is permissible, as your shot is still a true representation of that bit of the scene captured, cloning it out is NOT permissible as you have altered the reality of the bit you shot.

Of course we all know that cameras can only record very small segments of time and the area in which wars are fought. We all know that photographers choose what to shoot and there is other stuff outside the frame. But we still NEED to know that what we see in the shot is what was actually in front of the camera at the time, and hasn't had things removed or added for effect. If it becomes allowable to alter what was in the scene, all photojournalism becomes devalued and untrustworthy.

Do you prefer the Korean or Russian system, where people are removed from shots, because it was inconvenient that they were present? Or missile tests show three times as many missiles as they actually possessed? Start allowing the scene to be changed and it is a slippery slope from "better composition" to "propaganda".




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AZGeorge
Goldmember
Avatar
2,653 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 752
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Southen Arizona
     
Jan 23, 2014 10:00 |  #14

Mr. Contreras clearly violated an important standard of photo journalism but I agree there is probably more to the story than the AP is giving us. Perhaps they are leaping to show their purity in hopes everyone will forget about last year's self-created Iran bomb drawing hoax.


George
Democracy Dies in Darkness

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xburrows
Member
71 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Colorado US
     
Jan 23, 2014 15:06 as a reply to  @ AZGeorge's post |  #15

Here is the AP policy : AP NEWS VALUES & PRINCIPLES (external link)
About halfway down is the section on images.

I find it interesting that "The removal of 'red eye' from photographs is not permissible."




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,443 views & 0 likes for this thread
AP bans photographer.
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Albertm1010
542 guests, 175 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.