Photojournalism and Manipulation

R

rjhorsfall

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4
Name
Rick Horsfall
Edit My Images
Yes
I am a student at the University of Lincoln, studying media production. I am going into my third year and am starting to work towards my dissertation. I have a huge passion for photography and this has led me on to look at manipulation within photography and its effects within a specific area of the photography world. I want to get some opinions from a professional. My current question is below.

Photographic manipulation in photojournalism, how does this affect the consumer and the industry in relation to reality, truth, morality and trust?

I would like some opinions on the subject of manipulation in photojournalism. Is it right or wrong and if there is room for both, where should the lines be drawn?

Has digital technology taken manipulation to an extreme in terms of the photographer’s ability and the consumer’s trust in their work?

If you have anything else or ideas that may help me with my research such as, websites, journals, writers names and any case studies then I would be very grateful. Hope you can make time for me.

Thank you for your time!

Rick Horsfall

rickhorsfall24@hotmail.com
 
Digital Manipulation is not really allowed. However. I have removed items such as a persons finger or another photographers camera from some pictures.
 
As a photographer you dont manipulate a picture your sending to the newspapers... Apart from the moral issues blah blah ZZZzzz.. If you get caught your dead in the business..

However newspapers can and will edit them..
 
I seem to remember(I could be wrong) a few years ago. A war zone pic in one of the papers. The pic in question was photoshopped to make it appear more dramatic. It all kicked up a bit of a stink as i recall.

So......It isn't considered a done thing.

EDIT.....

I think this was it.......second pic down(not very convincing now) http://blogs.photopreneur.com/the-worlds-most-famous-photoshop-fakes
 
The interesting thing about that photo is that there was simply no need to do it. Even to the untrained eye the original photo is shocking enough and conveys the appropriate sense of destruction.
 
Over ther years theres been lot's of issues with this. the war zone pic mentioned can be seen here http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/ Then there was a case of I think it was the emperor of China? photographed with his son, trouble was they never had a pic taken together, one was in shirt sleeves, the other a winter coat.
When I worked for a newspaper I was told to carry a childs shoe and toy to place near fatal accidents to "add impact" I never did, that was a line even I wouldn't cross. Wayne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top