It's a very thin line, because if you are a manager and you change the way a photo looks whether it's noticeable or not it still changes the photo. When we take a photo sometimes it doesn't show the reality or the purpose the photographer had when the took it, so then when we add photoshop we're changing the reality of the photo even more.
B. What is the philosophy of newspapers like the Washington Post and the New York times regarding image manipulation?
They provide a strict guiltiness on how to shoot and edit their photographs, for example, the charlotte observers photo policy states', "no colors will be altered from the original scene photographed. "
C. What do you think are acceptable things you could do to an image and not cross the line unto an unethical manipulation?
Making a picture a little bright, or add a little light to it making it easier to see what the picture is.
Step 2:
To me this is an unethical photo, the reason why I think that is because the school wanted to seem more diverse. So, what they did was take a picture of one class, then a year later they took a picture of a different class, then put him into the first picture. Which isn't "wrong" but its not really appropriate.
Step 3:
I think that in the Times picture it is really heard to see his face, so in the Newsweek picture that make the picture a little lighter so you're able to see his face features, and face in general.
No comments:
Post a Comment