ZeissFan
Veteran
Amateur Photographer reported this today on its Web site.
Briefly, the New York Times had a photo essay on its site of a UK photographer. The NYT statement said the alterations made to the photo were minimal.
I wonder how the New York Times would have handled this Web essay if the photographer had said from the outset that he had altered the images and presented "before" and "after" photos.
Some make changes to photos. Some don't.
I guess it's just too easy, and line between cleaning up and changing can get blurred.
NOTE: Metafilter says the photographer is Portugese. Not that the photographer's nationality is at issue.
Briefly, the New York Times had a photo essay on its site of a UK photographer. The NYT statement said the alterations made to the photo were minimal.
I wonder how the New York Times would have handled this Web essay if the photographer had said from the outset that he had altered the images and presented "before" and "after" photos.
Some make changes to photos. Some don't.
I guess it's just too easy, and line between cleaning up and changing can get blurred.
NOTE: Metafilter says the photographer is Portugese. Not that the photographer's nationality is at issue.
Last edited:
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
This seems to be the same incident discussed on T.O.P a few days ago. The photographer appears to have produced symetrical compositions by mirroring half a frame to the other side of his image using Photoshop. The photographer (Edgar Martins) is known for his rants against the evils of digital manipulation of images 
...Mike
...Mike
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Hang them by their thumbs from the yardarm.
I thought digital cameras used watermarks? Add MD5 checksums (or something like them) to the image created in the camera, and Editor's should ask that the Raw file as produced by the camera be submitted with the final image being purchased. Not foolproof, watermarks and checksums can be fixed-up. That's like a Digital Equivalent of asking to see the negatives.
Now- Ten years ago, by Boss would only believe that one of my pictures was real if it was a Polaroid.
Now- Ten years ago, by Boss would only believe that one of my pictures was real if it was a Polaroid.
Sparrow
Veteran
Polaroid! I have an airbrush and I’m not afraid to use it …
.
.
He had to see the picture Eject from the SLR690.
I had a Gould/Deanza 8500 image processor in 1982 and was not afraid to use it...
I had a Gould/Deanza 8500 image processor in 1982 and was not afraid to use it...
Sparrow
Veteran
You couldn’t drag them round with your finger before they set then?
Actually I tried to clean my super-63 at the weekend, not used it in years, the thread on the needle mandrill snapped as I was taking it to bits!! It’s obsolete now too
Actually I tried to clean my super-63 at the weekend, not used it in years, the thread on the needle mandrill snapped as I was taking it to bits!! It’s obsolete now too
ZeissFan
Veteran
Supposedly, this photographer is in high demand for commercial work. I wonder if this will turn into a very nasty fight in a courtroom.
He offered a somewhat baffling reply today to Amateur Photographer:
"I would simply like to say that I anticipated this discussion, though not in its present format. I think the conversation merely needs to be refocused."
He told the magazine he will release a full statement within the next few days.
He offered a somewhat baffling reply today to Amateur Photographer:
"I would simply like to say that I anticipated this discussion, though not in its present format. I think the conversation merely needs to be refocused."
He told the magazine he will release a full statement within the next few days.