The oldest tricks work the best.
Posted on 07/09/2009 6:31:52 AM PDT by AIM Freeper
The New York Times has removed photos from its website that appear to have been digitally altered.
From Fishbowl NY
Editor & Publisher noticed that the New York Times had taken down a slideshow of photos by Portuguese photographer Edgar Martins that had appeared in this
Sunday's magazine depicting abandoned house construction projects in the wake of the financial crisis.
Now, instead of the gallery online, there is a short statement from the paper: "The pictures in this feature were removed after questions were raised about whether they had been digitally altered."
It's unclear who made the original allegations of Photoshopping, but E&P points to this feed on MetaFilter.com. One of the posters replied with this link, which purports to show evidence of possible digital altering by using animation. Seems like pretty damning evidence to us.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
At least they issued a reason.
Old SOP was to remove the offending material, without comment, and hope no one noticed.
My only question is ... why alter the original image? It was fine the way it was. Mirroring it added very little.
Well, National Geographic rationalised it this way, “It created a more dramatic image.”
They cut two images in half back in 2003 or so, and stuck the halves together.
In one original image, a soldier had his weapon slightly up, and was waving someone off.
In the other original image, one man was standing up from the ground.
In the altered image, the soldier was waving the guy off while pointing a weapon at him.
ANY alterations are suspect and immediate corrupt the images viability.
Remember OJ’s lighting fiasco on the cover of NEWSWEEK?
Even cropping can be an issue.
Better to avoid it altogether.
The oldest tricks work the best.
Blame Jason Blair.
Everyone remembers them altering the photo of OJ. But was it Time or Newsweak that did the same to Rush Limbaugh?
That was the L.A. Times. maybe they bought the picture from NG, but it ran on their front page. Every time I write a letter to the editor I ask whatever happened to that photographer.
bttt
Wish I could find the image and the originals.
Would be quite interesting.
He went down the memory hole.
They might be in the L.A. Times archives because they had to run them when they printed their apology. A very sweet moment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.