Photo Manipultion and ethics
What are some of the main points you read about in the website above regarding manipulating images?
- Adobe Photoshop, for example, has transformed photograph editing into an art. In the past, red eye reduction and photo retouching took hours. Thanks to the precision of programs like Photoshop and iPhoto, photographers can “fix” an image in a matter of seconds.
- While there are rules that clearly state what a photographer can and cannot do, many feel as if the “rules” no longer apply to them, especially with the circulation of magazines like People, Star and the National Inquirer
- In the past, photograph distortion took several weeks. As time progressed, photograph distortion went from taking weeks, to a few hours, to now only a few minutes. Photoshop has made it easy to doctor a photo or graphic design, with very little help
What is the philosophy of newspapers like the Washington Post and the New York times regarding image manipulation?
They have to be precise with their photo's and how they catch the image.
What do you think are acceptable things you could do to an image and not cross the line unto an unethical manipulation?
I think you can make them more tan (but not too much), and make their teeth straight and whitened.
Least Ethnical
I think this photo is least Ethnical because they changed the color of the persons body to match the "new head". Putting someone's head onto another person's body is crossing the line. Even if you are the bet photographer in the world, they can trace back the original photo and it will not work out in the end. Changing heads is a huge mistake and doesn't look the most professional.
Most Ethnical
- Adobe Photoshop, for example, has transformed photograph editing into an art. In the past, red eye reduction and photo retouching took hours. Thanks to the precision of programs like Photoshop and iPhoto, photographers can “fix” an image in a matter of seconds.
- While there are rules that clearly state what a photographer can and cannot do, many feel as if the “rules” no longer apply to them, especially with the circulation of magazines like People, Star and the National Inquirer
- In the past, photograph distortion took several weeks. As time progressed, photograph distortion went from taking weeks, to a few hours, to now only a few minutes. Photoshop has made it easy to doctor a photo or graphic design, with very little help
What is the philosophy of newspapers like the Washington Post and the New York times regarding image manipulation?
They have to be precise with their photo's and how they catch the image.
What do you think are acceptable things you could do to an image and not cross the line unto an unethical manipulation?
I think you can make them more tan (but not too much), and make their teeth straight and whitened.
Least Ethnical
I think this photo is least Ethnical because they changed the color of the persons body to match the "new head". Putting someone's head onto another person's body is crossing the line. Even if you are the bet photographer in the world, they can trace back the original photo and it will not work out in the end. Changing heads is a huge mistake and doesn't look the most professional.
Most Ethnical
I think this photo is most Ethnical because the photo didn't change too much. They changed the background color which everyone does to their photos and they made her less tan and I think that is fine because she just wants to look better and it is not a dramatic change. When an issue would start to occur is when they start majorly changing the way she looks so they can have her look the way they want her to look.
Comments
Post a Comment