Dissertation about Journalism

foodpoison

foodpoison

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,253
Name
Sean
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello guys

I'm doing a dissertation on Photojournalism (it's actually titled 'Has the digital revolution affected truthfulness in Journalism, specifically Photojournalism?') and I'd like your views. I've posted a survey on Facebook and Twitter, but that's mostly 20 somethings who don't give a toss about photojournalism haha.

Basically I'm asking 2 things of you:
1. Take this survey --> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XP5N79W - it's only 5 questions and literally takes 10 seconds.
2. Answer these questions in as few or as many words as you'd like -
a) Do you believe that the advance of technology in the past century has affected the way that the media presents information and images?
b) Do you believe that image manipulation is present and rife within photojournalism? To what extent?

If you are interested in this topic, please discuss it with me as it's great primary research. If you're not, taking the survey will suffice.
Whatever you do, your input is seriously appreciated.
 
foodpoison said:
b) Do you believe that image manipulation is present and rife within photojournalism? To what extent?
Click to expand...


It happens, but it's not rife- if you are refering to underhand image enhancements that is. Cut outs are done everyday of the week.

Generally if a staff or contract photographer is found manipulating his own images by any more than basic global adjustments, then he is going to get the sack.

The most obvious recent examples are:


Brian Walski, LA Times, 2003

Adnan Hajj, Reuters, 2006

Miguel Tovar, AP, 2011
 
Examples and everything! You're a star.

I've found various examples of image manipulation. The best, most recent one is the image of 'dead Osama' - it turned out to be a composite of 2 images. 1. a John Doe, 2. Alive Osama
 
Jayst84 said:
You'll find a lot of in depth discussion from people who know what they're talking about, compared to what you'll get on here. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Excuse me? Would you care to expand on that massively inaccurate assumption?
 
foodpoison said:
Examples and everything! You're a star.

I've found various examples of image manipulation. The best, most recent one is the image of 'dead Osama' - it turned out to be a composite of 2 images. 1. a John Doe, 2. Alive Osama
Click to expand...

The "best" (read: most blatant) example is the O.J. Simpson cover as noted here, along with some other relevant examples of image manipulation.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
The "best" (read: most blatant) example is the O.J. Simpson cover as noted here, along with some other relevant examples of image manipulation.
Click to expand...

It's not a bad article Graham, except that it doesn't really answer the question about the 'digital revolution', as all of those pictures were shot on film. If we're looking back that far then one of the classics would be the Nat Geo cover in 1982 where two of the pyramids were shifted to fit them into the frame. Also, all of those edits were performed at the desk.

There's a big difference between editorial manipulation and that done by the photographer themselves, without the desk's knowledge.

You could also argue that not correcting known camera errors is unethical. Redeye is a classic example.

Are these two front pages ethical shots?

http://minority-thought.com/media/2011/07/devilishly-stupid

Is the well known photograph of HRH Prince Andrew, that has the redeye left in making him look daft, ethical?
If you edit anomalies for most photographs, shouldn't it be done for all of them?
 
Years of archives of some of the best in the business, discussing the topic of his dissertation. Or a thread that had two replies before falling to the bottom of page two.

I didn't say you won't get anything useful here, I pointed him to a great resource where he can quickly get far more information. Which is demonstrably true. :thumbs:
 
Jayst84 said:
Years of archives of some of the best in the business, discussing the topic of his dissertation. Or a thread that had two replies before falling to the bottom of page two.

I didn't say you won't get anything useful here, I pointed him to a great resource where he can quickly get far more information. Which is demonstrably true. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

A point that could have been made without implying that people on here didn't "know what they're talking about".
 
Getting back on topic.......

is this actually for a dissertation, or are we really talking about an essay?
 
No, it's actually for my dissertation haha.

I've only got 2 assignments this semester.
1. Fiction Production - 2 min film, 8 min film, working portfolio
2. Final Major Project - 3500 word planning project and a creative piece

Safe to say uni isn't for the elite, this is less work than I had in Sixth form :lol:

Thanks for the links guys they're seriously useful. I've got to write a 1000 word literature review and I don't think 1000 words is going to be enough. I could write a 10,000 dissertation on just the research I've found.
 
I'm discussing the effect the digital revolution has had on image manipulation, with image manipulation now undoubtedly easier than it ever was on film. Older examples are good too, as it shows the history - it seems that image manipulation isn't a new thing, so what I'm looking to find out if it's more commonplace and thus more accepted.
 
foodpoison said:
No, it's actually for my dissertation haha.

I've only got 2 assignments this semester.
1. Fiction Production - 2 min film, 8 min film, working portfolio
2. Final Major Project - 3500 word planning project and a creative piece

Safe to say uni isn't for the elite, this is less work than I had in Sixth form :lol:

Thanks for the links guys they're seriously useful. I've got to write a 1000 word literature review and I don't think 1000 words is going to be enough. I could write a 10,000 dissertation on just the research I've found.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's so little compared to my degree! I'm guessing you're final year as you're writing your dissertation?
 
foodpoison said:
No, it's actually for my dissertation haha.

I've only got 2 assignments this semester.
1. Fiction Production - 2 min film, 8 min film, working portfolio
2. Final Major Project - 3500 word planning project and a creative piece

Safe to say uni isn't for the elite, this is less work than I had in Sixth form :lol:

Thanks for the links guys they're seriously useful. I've got to write a 1000 word literature review and I don't think 1000 words is going to be enough. I could write a 10,000 dissertation on just the research I've found.
Click to expand...

3500 words isn't a dissertation, that's just an essay :lol:
 
Did you see the article (widely circulated at the time)10b published last year? They're an Italian lab that do post production for a lot of VII, Noor and other high profile photojournalists. The English version seems to be offline at the moment but it's on the BJP here.

With regards to fixing redeye as Mark mentioned, it's interesting to note that the AP don't allow it.
 
Jayst84 said:
Did you see the article (widely circulated at the time)10b published last year? They're an Italian lab that do post production for a lot of VII, Noor and other high profile photojournalists. The English version seems to be offline at the moment but it's on the BJP here.

With regards to fixing redeye as Mark mentioned, it's interesting to note that the AP don't allow it.
Click to expand...

Reuters don't either, from memory. It's down to the relevant publication's picture desk to decide, but personally I think that it falls into the unethical area when it is used to make a point or enhance a feature because it is a know anomaly.

The BJP article on 10b is a good one, and some of the UKq's top flight press photographers have commented on it. As for VII, probably the less said the better!
 
DemiLion said:
Reuters don't either, from memory. It's down to the relevant publication's picture desk to decide, but personally I think that it falls into the unethical area when it is used to make a point or enhance a feature because it is a know anomaly.

The BJP article on 10b is a good one, and some of the UKq's top flight press photographers have commented on it. As for VII, probably the less said the better!
Click to expand...

Yep, bit of a strange one. You'd think it would fall under 'normal corrections to restore the integrity of the scene' or however it was they worded it. As if you're stood looking at someone, you obviously don't see redeye. :shrug: Good point to bring up for discussion in an essay then.

Some great photographers at VII, like Marcus Bleasdale. At least Natchwey's left now. ;)
 
foodpoison said:
Hello guys

I'm doing a dissertation on Photojournalism (it's actually titled 'Has the digital revolution affected truthfulness in Journalism, specifically Photojournalism?') and I'd like your views. I've posted a survey on Facebook and Twitter, but that's mostly 20 somethings who don't give a toss about photojournalism haha.

Basically I'm asking 2 things of you:
1. Take this survey --> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XP5N79W - it's only 5 questions and literally takes 10 seconds.
2. Answer these questions in as few or as many words as you'd like -
a) Do you believe that the advance of technology in the past century has affected the way that the media presents information and images?
b) Do you believe that image manipulation is present and rife within photojournalism? To what extent?

If you are interested in this topic, please discuss it with me as it's great primary research. If you're not, taking the survey will suffice.
Whatever you do, your input is seriously appreciated.
Click to expand...


Photography is about editing when you come to think about it

1. you edit before you press the shutter (I am / am not shooting that)
2. you edit by how you frame the shot, and to some extent how you shoot the shot
2. you edit after pressing the shutter - starting with the delete button

Then there is PP, you can edit by cropping, global improvements WB, exposure

So far none of these edits break the rule, yet up to this point a journalist can leverage quite a lot of his or her own thoughts into the final images

What digital has done

1. The roll of film is not processed by the paper any more, The photographer has far more control over what is or is not sent in. Consider editing by omission
2. The volume of shots has increased, in theory, this should improve the chances of being truthful or telling a complete story
3. Media as a whole has changed and is much more instant. a more pertinent question is "who are journalists" with the man on the street breaking news on twitter becoming more the norm...
4. We have become accustomed to lots of "small snippets" as opposed to one big picture

Consider this

- the iconic image of the naked girl running out of the village after the Napalm attack

It is memorable because it was honest, to the point, and underlined what people felt at the time

Consider this...

- Today the news spoke about the atrocities in Syria and we thought.. One slice of toast or two for breakfast

What digital / new media has done is totally immersed us in so much stuff that very few things actually grab our attention any more
 
Isn't it nice when the op doesn't bother coming back to the thread after asking for help? :shake:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top