Photo Manipulation and Ethics
Some of the main points I read about in the website were how Photoshop can be a dangerous thing to use in the newspaper industry. Depending on the person, altering photo's can get you in trouble or worse, sued or fired.
Reputable newspapers like the Post and Times have strict guidelines around altering photos. Their photojournalists have to turn in proofs so they can be checked. Photos can be changed if the changes enhance the true story.
I think acceptable things you could do to an image and not cross the line unto an unethical manipulation is only changing some of the tones. If something is too bright or too dark it is okay to adjust those. Changing the actual subject itself crosses the line. Sometimes a photo's surroundings
might not make the picture as good as it could be; blurring those out or removing them can be acceptable sometimes. Sometimes, the line between ethical and unethical really depends on the photo you are working with and its purpose.
The TV Guide cover photo of Oprah is so bad for so many reasons, but most importantly, she had no idea they were going to do that to her body! She also didn't know they would make it look like she was sitting on a pile of money. Ann Margaret did not give her permission for her photo to be used. They picked a white woman's body to put on a Black woman. It's just wrong on so many levels.
The Newsweek photo straightened her teeth and changed her eye color from brown to blue. Only people who know her would really notice. I also think it depends on if she knew and wanted them to do it or not. If she wanted them to straighten her teeth, I think it's okay. If she didn't know, it could be embarrassing for her.
Reputable newspapers like the Post and Times have strict guidelines around altering photos. Their photojournalists have to turn in proofs so they can be checked. Photos can be changed if the changes enhance the true story.
I think acceptable things you could do to an image and not cross the line unto an unethical manipulation is only changing some of the tones. If something is too bright or too dark it is okay to adjust those. Changing the actual subject itself crosses the line. Sometimes a photo's surroundings
might not make the picture as good as it could be; blurring those out or removing them can be acceptable sometimes. Sometimes, the line between ethical and unethical really depends on the photo you are working with and its purpose.
The TV Guide cover photo of Oprah is so bad for so many reasons, but most importantly, she had no idea they were going to do that to her body! She also didn't know they would make it look like she was sitting on a pile of money. Ann Margaret did not give her permission for her photo to be used. They picked a white woman's body to put on a Black woman. It's just wrong on so many levels.
The Newsweek photo straightened her teeth and changed her eye color from brown to blue. Only people who know her would really notice. I also think it depends on if she knew and wanted them to do it or not. If she wanted them to straighten her teeth, I think it's okay. If she didn't know, it could be embarrassing for her.
Comments
Post a Comment