Reuters Editor: Photog Was Not Trying to 'Make a Statement' in Altered Image(Reuters Fauxtography)

Editor and Publisher ^ | August 08, 2006 | E&P Staff

[RansomOttawa]

"I believe he was trying to take a picture and make it better rather than trying to take a picture and make a statement," Hershorn told National Public Radio in an interview aired today.

Hey, extra burning carnage always makes pictures "better."

Riiiiiight.

[Chode]

i'm sure photoshop would be more than willing to sell you a LOCKED DOWN version that would eliminate most of these um, problems...

[Republican Red]

NYT has now been busted in the Fauxtography scandal

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1680190/posts?page=3#3

[Chode]

o,yeah... as to his not making a statement.

then why did the picture he got caught for make it look like TWO strikes when there was only ONE???

that's why he took the smoke out from the middle and cloned it only where he wanted it... two strikes for the price on one.

[ladyinred]

I am cracking up! Maybe the lefties are stupid, but we aren't!

[observer5]

"What we in the news photo community need to regulate is what tools are used for photojournalism and what are not."

A hint: No "Fake but Accurate" tools!

[mdittmar]

Great catch,see post #50

Gary Hershorn explaining away any scurrilous accusations of journalistic "bias"! Well, there's a name from the past... Remember this little episode from the U.N.? Reuters Explains Photo Of Bush Bathroom Note September 15, 2005

This deserves it's own thread,post it.

[driftdiver]

"The question is, in addition to the altered images, how many photo shots were staged and overseen by Hizbollah minders."

Proper question may be how many weren't staged.

[finnman69]

Fake but accurate

[finnman69]

actually credit, LGF

http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fauxtography

I just loved the term so much I plastered it all over FR

[dynachrome]

It's everywhere now! (Michelle Malkin)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1680190/posts

[samiam230]

Just how does dust get on a digital photograph?

The dust is not "on" the digital photograph (i.e. image). Rather the dust is on the camara lens or sensor (which happes quite often when you are taking photographs in a desert), resulting in the splotches on the photograph. In fact, sensor dust on digital cameras is SO common, that there are literally hundreds upon hundreds of websites available on how to clean the dust off your sensor and off your images. A small sampling follows:

example 1 example 2 example 3 example 4 example 5 example 6 example 7 example 8 example 9

and on and on and on. Try Googling it:

[TXnMA]

How long the new name makes it to the evening news! :)

~~~~~~~~~~

Michelle Malkin is already using it!

"Fauxtography" alert: NYTimes and USNews
By Michelle Malkin · August 08, 2006 08:58 PM

[DainBramage]

If its so common then is lets back check everybody at Reuters...huh? Sounds so familiar with his other crabbing excuses.
I wonder if this note was real or if the White House just chose to ignore it?

© Rick Wilking/Reuters The wider of two Reuters photos showing President Bush asking for a bathroom break.

Reuters Explains Photo Of Bush Bathroom Note

September 15, 2005
By Daryl Lang Don't blame the photographer.

That's the message from Gary Hershorn, a picture editor for Reuters, about the photo yesterday that shows President George W. Bush writing an all-too-human note during a UN meeting.

Bush is shown writing: "I think I may need a bathroom break. Is this possible."

The photo, which quickly became fodder for blogs and e-mails among friends, was taken by Rick Wilking, a contract photographer based in Denver who recently covered the flooding in New Orleans.

Hershorn, Reuters' news editor for pictures for the Americas, says he's responsible for zooming in on the note and deciding to transmit the photo to Reuters clients. He says Wilking didn't know what the note said when he shot the picture.

"I'm so adamant that Rick has nothing to do with this. He was just the guy who pushed the button," Hershorn says.

In response to the attention the photo is getting, Reuters' spokeswoman in London released a two-sentence statement about the picture: "The photographer and editors on this story were looking for other angles in their coverage of this event, something that went beyond the stock pictures of talking heads that these kind of forums usually offer. This picture certainly does that."

So how did the picture happen?

According to Hershorn, Wilking was one of several photographers covering the United Nations Security Council meeting between about 11 and noon yesterday. He was part of a pool stationed on a balcony that faced Bush's back; a group of White House photographers was on a balcony facing the president.

Wilking shot about 200 images and sent two memory cards to the press room at the U.N., where Hershorn was working. Hershorn looked at the images on a computer and initially decided not to send any of them.

But a few hours later, he started to wonder about a note that Bush was seen writing in three of the pictures. Out of curiosity, he zoomed in to see if he could read it.

Once he saw what it said, Hershorn decided the note was interesting and worth publishing. The white parts of the picture were overexposed, so a Reuters processor used Photoshop to burn down the note. This is a standard practice for news photos, Hershorn says, and the picture was not manipulated in any other way.

Around 4:30 p.m., Reuters transmitted two versions of the photo, including one that was tightly cropped around the note and Bush's hand.

The caption says that Bush was writing the note to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice; Hershorn says Wilking saw Bush write the note and hand the note to Rice.

Hershorn says heads of state seldom attend Security Council meetings, and it's possible that Bush was simply asking his secretary of state what the proper protocol was to be excused.

Online, some accused Reuters, and the media in general, of being insulting or juvenile. A letter writer to Editor & Publisher wrote, "You ought to all be ashamed of yourselves for this stupid trivia and childish focus."

It's unclear how widely the picture was published; Hershorn says The (Toronto) Globe and Mail published it but he wasn't sure of any other outlets. Hershorn says he decided to transmit the picture because it was interesting.

"There was no malicious intent," he says. "That's not what we do."

[rwfromkansas]

That is a really, really, really, really, good label for it.

[tacticalogic]

"I believe he was trying to take a picture and make it better rather than trying to take a picture and make a statement," Hershorn told National Public Radio in an interview aired today. PLEASE!....do they really expect us to believe that!

If we do believe it, then we have to ask what it was about this that was "making it better". If he's only trying to sell pictures, then the only reason this makes it "better" is that the buyer is "trying to make a statement".

[Northern Alliance]

"I believe he was trying to take a picture and make it better rather than trying to take a picture and make a statement,"... The second photo showed an Israeli jet releasing three flares – while the original photo showed one flare.... Referring to the smoke photo, Hershorn told NPR, "This one slipped through the system.

So the second one didn't slip through the system, but was accepted knowing it was faked?

Bloggers had posted observations that it looked like a Photoshop “cloning” tool was used.

Love those bloggers! Where would we be without them!

[StAnDeliver]

3 grafs of darkroom drek from the Last Century doesn't change the fact that even a casual PShop user could see these were clumsy cloning tool enhancements.

This Shoehorn doofus is clearly fighting to save his job at this point...

[Not now, Not ever!]

If this guy believes that he must be retarded.

As are most of his ilk.

[MalikDelosReyes]

Yeah, sure - lighting Korans on fire and taking pictures of them is for artistic purpose.

Idiots who think we're idiots.