Manipulated Associated Press photo of Condoleezza Rice published online by USA Today
Posted on 08/08/2006 9:30:06 AM PDT by sionnsar
USA Today gives Condi
'demon eyes,' pulls photo
Paper admits it gave secretary of state
'unnatural appearance' in Web edition
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
|
|
USA Today pulled a photograph of Condoleezza Rice from its website after a weblog revealed it was manipulated, giving the secretary of state a menacing, demon-eyesing stare.
 Original AP photo |
The remarkable changes were first noted by a weblog called The Pen, which cited an original version of the Associated Press photograph.
After a host of weblogs highlighted the photo, the nationwide newspaper removed it with this explanation:
Editor's note: The photo of Condoleezza Rice that originally accompanied this story was altered in a manner that did not meet USA TODAY's editorial standards. The photo has been replaced by a properly adjusted copy. Photos published online are routinely cropped for size and adjusted for brightness and sharpness to optimize their appearance. In this case, after sharpening the photo for clarity, the editor brightened a portion of Rice's face, giving her eyes an unnatural appearance. This resulted in a distortion of the original not in keeping with our editorial standards.
But prior to the announcement, a number of experienced graphic artists wrote to weblogs, insisting the distortion was no mistake.
"That photo of Condi was deliberately manipulated," said a reader of Michelle Malkin's site who has used Photoshop for 10 years.
Another Photoshop user had suggested the photo might have been prepared for print publishing, which sometimes requires that images be sharpened to accommodate a fuzzy format.
The reader believed USA Today used a filter from the program Photoshop called Unsharp Mask, which brings out detail in soft photos.
But the 10-year Photoshop user said he put the photo through the Unsharp Mask filter in Photoshop 5.5 and "could not duplicate what was done."
The reader argued any filter in Photoshop would apply to the whole image, concluding "the image was deliberately manipulated around the eyes."
Also, he said, "Notice how the pupils have been narrowed, like a cat's eyes. Sharpening would not alter the roundness of her pupils, only accentuate them. Another paint or erase tool is required to achieve that effect."
She looks a lot like a Muslim to me.
Why am I not surprised by this?
Makes you wonder all the other "cooked" pictures and storys they had gotten away with over the years before the internet.
So they said it was inadvertent? I would think that the majority of reasonable people would recognize this as a lie. So they turned one F-up into two.
Move along, kids... no blatantly obvious evidence of leftist media bias here...
For a brief history of 'doctored' photos, see the following link and page down to the section: Reuters: Don't DARE Question Their Veracity.
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/2006_08.php
This blog also includes more information on this most recent Reuters fakery. Page down to the section: Another Fake Reuters Photo from Lebanon.
It does, doesn't it?
Just another day at the msm.
ot is of, I am blind today...
That looks more like Zombie eyes to me.
These photo doctoring episodes seem to be a test to see how far the media can go and what excuses can be generated that the sheeple will swallow.
Ever watch Stargate? Obviously, she is a G'ould.
Funny how the filter only brought out the "Demon Eyes!"
Wasn't that long ago "they" were saying, "Yeah, but, they got that off the Internet!"
Thank you. We'll be here all week.
}:-)4
I've modified photos of my kids before with photoshop trying to remove redeye and fix the eyes for various reasons. I've had the same sort of effect becasue I'm really bad at it. However, I was able to at least recognize how bad it looked and not keep the modifications, let alone print them for public consumption.
It was no mistake that this made it to print.
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.