Skip to main content

photographer vs Newsweek 3030 Responses

Last post: 3 years, 8 months ago | Thread started: Sep 19, 09, 6:28 a.m.

RespondNew TopicDisable Images

  • freitag

    without getting political, as this is about an editorial decision, which in my opinion, was rightly criticized by the photographer.

    Essay: Chop and Crop
    http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/20…

    Sep 19, 09, 6:28 a.m. – Permalink
  • sea_sea

    i agree with the photographers point, but is there a way to prevent any butchering of your image from happening? he did get paid for that image, does he lose all his rights once he does that?

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 9:23 a.m. – Permalink
  • ribit

    depends entirely on the contract

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 11:31 a.m. – Permalink
  • bolus

    without getting into rights issues, that image, which was only half decent to start with, was pretty poorly cropped.....

    and I can see the photographers point, though I'm not sure what his legal position would be

    • that was a horrible crop. why is that lady's butt still in it? shes either in or not i hate that "half ass" thing.– sea_sea1/2
      agreed, sea_sea.– freitag2/2
    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 11:35 a.m. – Permalink
  • sikma

    "However, Newsweek’s objective in running the cropped version was to illustrate its editorial point of view, which could only have been done by shifting the content of the image so that readers just saw what the editors wanted them to see. This radical alteration is photo fakery. Newsweek’s choice to run my picture as a political cartoon not only embarrassed and humiliated me and ridiculed the subject of the picture, but it ultimately denigrated my profession."

    He sounds like a first year art student on his first assignment. What was he expecting Newsweek was going to saw about the guy? That he's a saint? For someone who's been in the industry for over 25 years this is an odd fight to pick.

    Further more the shot is crap to begin with. Looks like something my aunt would've taken.

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 11:39 a.m. – Permalink
  • GeorgesII

    He's scared because he's going to get shot in the face.

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 11:42 a.m. – Permalink
  • sikma

    and really is the crop that damning? the context of the image still remains the same - man cutting something. this guy needs to get some fresh air.

    • he has a point, but a poor example to illustrate it– acescence
    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 11:44 a.m. – Permalink
  • luckyorphan

    Kennerly is a crybaby.

    Photojournalists are not photo editors. If he wanted to control how his image is used, he should have either stipulated total control in his contract. But since he didn't, he should have accepted the fact that once he was paid for it, and it left his hands, it was out of his control.

    A photojournalist is a conduit between an event, and the public who was not on the scene themselves. In this case, the event happened, he took a picture of it, and sold it.

    To wrap it up, what should we infer from his choice of angle and selection of the image to capture? Why did he not capture just Cheney at the cutting board, instead of the entire room? Perhaps he's a republican?

    Please.

    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 2:51 p.m. – Permalink
  • colin_s

    as someone with a master's degree in photojournalism, i'd say i'm partial to the photographer's POV here. not only does he have a valid point, but it's against journalistic standards to really do what newsweek did. it is blatant editorializing and using the picture out of context like that is pretty lame.

    however, this shit happens all the time. it's not the photographer's fault, and this has nothing to do with rights and licensing. it's an editorial board decision, and a shitty one.

    • At one point in time, the former VP was cutting a steak. This was photographed, sold and then printed. That is the result of the picture taken.– luckyorphan1/2
      ...picture taken. This is like a knife maker complaining that one of their products was used to kill someone.– luckyorphan2/2
    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 3:20 p.m. – Permalink
  • CyBrain

    they could have used another shot, but didn't it occur to the photographer that they were going to have to crop that photo to fit the vertical format anyway?

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 4:20 p.m. – Permalink
  • pr2

    I hate Chaney more then i do pizza and yet i still stand by that photographer's POV.

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 4:37 p.m. – Permalink
  • inhaler97

    Wait, since when did newsweek ever do an amazing job at cropping?

    Also, its at the editors discretion. Taking Cheney's statement, placing it on a picture of him stabbing a piece of meat, of something that CLEARLY looks like hes about to eat, or prep a plate, of course its going to look biased. The editor is not an idiot. (or maybe, who knows)

    As far as the photographer goes, He got paid for his job, and he should walk away. On his contract it probably states that his photograph can be cropped and used to the publications discretion. The public should become aware of this, but most aren't educated in the matter.

    Why I like Magnum's approach to their photography, because if it ever used in print, it has to be printed Full Frame, (no cropping) and Credit given.

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 7:46 p.m. – Permalink
  • inhaler97

    Also my other question is, we are seeing one page of the magazine, what happened to the other page? Im guessing its ads, and not the other half of the picture, hence the discussion, but Im just saying, what was shown to us there, is just one page.

    • Yep. Got the mag right here. It's an ad.– luckyorphan
    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 7:48 p.m. – Permalink
  • freitag

    imho
    it is about the integrity of the photographer, he was granted to enter into the private life of this family and now the photo gets ripped out of context and used entirely against Cheney. It may become hard for the photographer to ever be allowed in anywhere again.

    THAT is the point.

    (i think, having been a press photographer for years myself..)

    • Agree, but disagree. The point is that he loses control of a photo once it is sold. If he wants more control, he should put it in the contract.– luckyorphan1/2
      ...contract. Otherwise, it's up fer grabs.– luckyorphan2/2
    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 7:57 p.m. – Permalink
  • version3

    he put the image on getty, any of us has the right to pay our license fee and crop that image however we see fit for whatever purpose we see fit. if the photographer feared possible repercussions from unwanted use, he should have thought of that before placing it within the public domain.

    • but yeah, if he threw it into the open, it's his own fault ultimately..– freitag
    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 8:18 p.m. – Permalink
  • Tungsten

    it's an average photo that was cropped badly to illustrate a weak editorial slant. I'm surprised a photographer with that level of experience wouldn't be able just laugh this off, instead of making such a big deal out of it. He's working for Getty and Newsweek... what did he expect? I understand his concern for journalistic integrity, but come on, when you shoot Cheney cutting up a piece of bloody meat what do expect the photo is going to be used for?
    Newsweek is in the same position as every other magazine right now... desperate for readers and advertising dollars.

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 8:34 p.m. – Permalink
  • Tungsten

    I just searched this photographers archive on Getty Images for the key word "Cheney" and found something interesting. He has some very intimate images of Dick Cheney and his family dating back as far as 1978. These include posed family portraits, and are generally a very positive and cheerful portrayal of the man. I'm not suggesting a political bias, but there is definitely a long standing familiarity with the family. Makes a little more sense now why he was so upset with the use of this photo.

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 8:56 p.m. – Permalink
  • version3

    there's some hotness in his portfolio
    http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…
    http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 10:20 p.m. – Permalink
  • version3

    http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 10:21 p.m. – Permalink
  • version3

    fuckin rumsfeld
    http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 10:23 p.m. – Permalink
  • version3

    our man cheney right here
    http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earSep 19, 09, 10:25 p.m. – Permalink

Login or Register to respond to this

Skip to main content