Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reuters Caught with Doctored Lebanon Photo, Again
Newsbusters/Reuters ^ | August 28 | John Armor

Posted on 08/28/2006 5:14:42 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing

You would think that Reuters learned its lesson about publishing to the world photos doctored to create a false image. After all, they were caught with multiple false photos from Lebanon, and had to take down more than 900 images from one stringer. Reuters promised it would have "experienced editors" look at all such photos in the future.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2006israelwar; 4thestate5thcolumn; alreuters; antiisrael; antisemites; biasmeanslayoffs; bullzogby; communisttrick; congame; crap; enemedia; fakephotos; fauxtography; goebbelswouldbeproud; hezbollah; hizbollywood; idiots; islamoganda; israel; lebanon; leftistsubversion; liberalmedia; makingitup; mediabias; mediajihad; mediawarwaronerror; middleeast; mslm; msm; msmwoes; needmorekeywords; pajamahadeen; pajamapeoplerule; picturekill; proterrorist; reuterbias; reutergate; reuterrorism; reuters; reutorrism; revisionisthistory; rotoreuters; rotorooters; terrorists; terrorsympathizers; traitors; treason; trysellingthetruth; whatabunchamorons; whywefight; zogbyism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last
To: Kieri

I'm not sure, but it looks like the photo was taken in the early evening maybe 30 minutes to an hour before sunset. You will notice that no direct sunlight is on the tank, but there obviously is behind it. Take a look some day when you are out driving around and you will see that the lighting can do weird things as sunset approaches.

Don't get me wrong, it doesn't surprise me at all to find out that Reuters, AP, etc. are doctoring photos. I'm just not sure about this one.


41 posted on 08/28/2006 6:24:24 AM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Changing the contrast is not doctoring a photo. Everybody needs to calm down.

This is on the intellectual level of DU posters noticing that a sitting President has a bulge in his jacket during a debate and concluding that Karl Rove was moving his jaw muscles with electrodes.


42 posted on 08/28/2006 6:30:24 AM PDT by Taliesan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing
^^^^^^^^^^Save it for the real thing.^^^^^^^^^^

Yeah, I have to agree. However, with all that Reuters and other lib media outlets have done up until this point, you can't blame people for overscrutinizing.

You sir are a true gentleman, open to criticism and thinking rationally. We need more like you.

 

43 posted on 08/28/2006 6:31:46 AM PDT by HawaiianGecko (Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Taliesan

Plus, I'm just not seeing what benefit they would derive from "washing out" the blue helmets and flag in this. The last thing the left wants to make people think is that the "glorious" UN would ever surrender.


44 posted on 08/28/2006 6:41:16 AM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing
Upon further review, many posters are correct - this pic is not "doctored" or "photoshopped".

It's now obvious that the photographer screwed up his f-stop settings and the original main subject image, the vehicle, was underexposed due to back-lighting. He should have known better if a pro and opened up a couple stops OR used his EV compensation dial. But he didn't so it was done in the lab, washing out the blue. (its still funny hough, French & 'White' Flag)

A first year Photo student knows about the evils of back-lighting and light meter readings

[I have a Nikon camera, I love to take photographs, don't take my Kodachrome away]

45 posted on 08/28/2006 7:10:03 AM PDT by Condor51 (Better to fight for something than live for nothing - Gen. George S. Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kieri
As to the words hanging in the sky, I'd assumed they were letters on posts. You don't see them often in the US anymore but they're still around.

Something like this? I found others with even fewer supports, but they were too big to post. Between blurring in the distance and jpeg compression I could see how the supports would disappear.

46 posted on 08/28/2006 7:10:37 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (UN Security Council resolution 1701: I believe it is ceasefire for our time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

The brightness was changed in order for the image of the chief hezzie to be visible. Since the flag was backlit, the sunlight was coming toward the camera. I'd wager the poster's features would be dark and indistinguishable and obviously Al Reuters couldn't let that stand, hence the change.


47 posted on 08/28/2006 7:21:12 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Tom Gallagher - the anti-Crist [FL Governor, 2006 primary])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
It's now obvious that the photographer screwed up his f-stop settings and the original main subject image, the vehicle, was underexposed due to back-lighting.

Or he may have had it properly exposed on a digital camera. Digital cameras' maximum value is much more defined than film. If the light blue (RGB = 133, 151, 193) got twice as much light as it should it would be RGB = 266, 302, 386. However, the pixels are limited to 255 so you get RGB = 255, 255, 255 or pure white. Film doesn't have such a sharp maximum, so it will still bluish.

Generally on digital cameras I underexpose the picture slightly because I can later brighten the picture to get it to look good. If it is overexposed then colors can be lost which cannot then be recovered by darkening the picture.

48 posted on 08/28/2006 7:26:27 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (UN Security Council resolution 1701: I believe it is ceasefire for our time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: HawaiianGecko

That's the half amazing part. *laughs*

I appreciate that.


49 posted on 08/28/2006 7:52:17 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing (Linux, the #2 OS. Mac, the #3 OS. That's why Picasa is on Linux and not Mac.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Non-event.

When a camera's aperture / shutter speed is set to capture detail in a relatively dark area, the brighter areas are overexposed and washed out of color, or even completely burned out to pure white. The exact opposite of when you take a picture on a bright day & the person (because he's in the shade) is nothing but a dark shadow. The photographer as focusing on dark areas (the poster of Nasrallah, the heavy equipment), while bright sunlight was shining on the helmets & flags.

In this case, it looks like photoshop could have been used to darken the helments & flag to make them look blue (the UN logo would have been clearly visible), but they didn't.


50 posted on 08/28/2006 8:31:01 AM PDT by sanchmo (If we wish to learn what was going on in Europe in 1938, just look around - V.D. Hanson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

This isn't a 'doctored' image in a nefarious sense. This is an image where there is an intense lightsource behind the foreground and in order to bring out the details of the foreground they had to do some dodging (lightening) or levels adjustments.

I've done photoshop work for 16 years and all they've done is make the image more presentable. They chose the image because of the content.


51 posted on 08/28/2006 9:04:16 AM PDT by Frapster (Don't mind me - I'm distracted by the pretty lights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hellinahandcart

NO!


52 posted on 08/28/2006 12:06:31 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson