photographer vs Newsweek
- Started
- Last post
- 30 Responses
- version30
CIA Chief George Bush Attends 1976 Cabinet Meeting
http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…
- version30
reagan + taxes
http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…
- version30
ansel adams looks like he was a nice man
http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…
- pr20
OK guys one thing is Getty where u buy images and do whatever u want with it another thing is Newsweek.
Unless Newsweek wants to be like New York Post - meaning paddler of made-up stories parading as news - it has certain responsibility to the reader. Now, many of us can see through such blatant editorial slant but it's because we work in the advertising (in one form or another and are well aware of manipulations that go on) yet i would not be so surprised if many otherwise smart readers of Newsweek couldn't see through it. Now Chaney is evil, and he's gonna roast in hell right next to Stalin, Hitler and Kissinger but... it's about a serious magazine loosing its face.
- version30
not to say that i agree but this is well stated...
It reminds me of the famous case of the Mountain of the Holy Cross, photographed in 1873 by William Henry Jackson on an expedition in Colorado to document the American west. A natural feature of the mountain is a craggy cross-shape defined by the contours of the mountain on one side. It is only visible, and only when the conditions are just right, in winter when a thin layer of snow settles into the contours of the mountainside.
Not many people know that Jackson altered his glass plate negative afterwards to exaggerate the visible cross-shape. His images were shown in Washington and the cities of the east, where Congress and devout Christians interpreted his “photograph” of the cross as a message from God, justifying westward expansion and the U.S. policy of Manifest Destiny.
Photography is a powerful medium, and has the unparalleled ability to touch passions and inflame public opinion.
It should be respected.
- version30
would've been better
http://www.gettyimages.com/detai…
- ukit0
Actually, I think the photographer has it wrong. It's should be perfectly fine to crop a picture (WTF are you going to do, never crop a picture?) as long as it preserves the original context.
I don't think anyone looking at this is going to see anything than what it actually shows - Cheney chopping some meat in a kitchen. It's not like they are actually gonna look at it and think Cheney is some kind of serial killer based on the photo.
In terms of using a picture to make a metaphorical point of some kind, newspapers and magazines do this all the time. What you could argue is off about this usage is just the crassness of showing a guy chopping up meat to make a point about torturing people. So it might be tasteless, but in terms of being misleading, I don't see how it qualifies there.
Overall, the guy is probably raising a stink about it to preserve his friendship or access to Cheney.
- version30
Absolutely false. Nothing could be further from the truth. Historically, cropping has been considered a cardinal sin by the vast majority of professional photographers. I went to art school where I majored in photography, and where students were encouraged to use “artistic license” to express their ideas.
Even there we were forbidden by our professors to crop our negatives. It was done very rarely, was always obvious, and considered cheap and lazy. The students themselves respected the history of the medium, and if they couldn’t express their ideas within the format they were working, they were told to try harder.
It was an issue of integrity and creative competence. If you cropped your negatives (this was in the late 90’s by the way, not 40-50 years ago), it was “weak” and “square”. Many of the photographers we studied are/were Magnum legends. I wonder if Mr. De Maria would care to ask the folks over at Magnum what they think of cropping and journalistic integrity.
- ribit0
Times have changed, industries have changed. (and this is general editorial, not a photography magazine). Imagery get mashed up, sampled, sliced and diced these days and people are used to seeing things out of context. It all depends on the individual contractual/editorial arrangement, whether the photo will be used only as submitted, in what reports, or what print magazine editions or websites it will be used in. Photographers should cover all this in the contract if they care about it.
- if u think it's about the photographer and his contract you are wrong.pr2