But anybody have a link that goes in depth?
(adminmoderator, this belongs in the sidebar, right? The other ones did)
For anybody interested, here is the first photoshopped image
And the second
I thought that Reuters canned Adnan Hajj? Apparently he wasn't the only one?
The flag isn't white. As bloggers have noted, the contrast on this photo has been punched up to turn light blue into white. The UN helmets which are actually light blue, seem white with slight shadows. The "white" flag is actually a back-lit, blue, UN flag. Confirmation of the doctoring of this photo is that the background of the poster in the upper right has entirely disappeared, so its black words seem to float in a "white" sky.
Am I the only one who thinks the photo is hilarious?
Brightness turned up to the point that the blue flag and helmets of the UN personnel appear white. Clearly doctored photo.
Unfortunately, though those items are not white, the net effect of what was done in this foolish cease fire is raltively accurate. We should have not only let Israel continue to destroy Hezbollah, we should have encouraged it until it was well and fully done.
Needs more keywords.
I think it's possible that Reuters played with the brightness on this one. But I don't think it's quite accurate to say that it was actually doctored. Because of glare, etc. it's not unusual to alter brightness before publishing a photo. It is possible that due to the glare of the sun this is the way it actually appeared and darkening it would have made everything look black.
Personally, I think the author is getting paranoid.
I'm not sure it is doctored.
It appears more to be lighting (sunlight) that gives the impression that the flag is white, rather than intentional doctoring.
I'm more worried about Israel's doctored military apparatus.
Bush Derangement Syndrome is proven to prevent learning from past mistakes in 99.9% of journalists and dems.
All I see is little red x's.
| Sometimes I think people get their panties in a wad for the sake of that wedgies feeling. So what? This guy smiling at a white flag or a UN flag makes no difference to me. When I first clicked onto this thread, before I read the part about the smile directed to the white flag, I simply couldn't find any part of the picture that made me think anything other than this guy looks like a kid.
The photographer probably saw the connection, took the shot and had to lighten it to get Nasrallah to even appear. Lightening the photo makes the image on photo paper look like the image the cameraman saw. That is not dishonest. It's no more dishonest than a photojournalist using a telephoto lens, or a polarizing one, or a sketch artist doing the graphic.
Sometimes I think people need a bit more Zoloft in their lives..
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
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.