Some main points regarding photo manipulations are that some photographers will merge, distort, or alter their photos in some way. They say they do this to better get their message across or to make an individual more attractive or something. This is seen as unionist photography, though. Just like you would;t change a persons quote nan interview, you shouldn't alter an image because then that shows something that isn't even truthful.
B. What is the philosophy of newspapers like the Washington Post and the New York times regarding image manipulation?The philosophy of the Washington Post and New York Times and other newspapers regarding image manipulation is that the photos should not be altered because thats displaying an untruthful event and photography is a truthful showing of something.
C. What do you think are acceptable things you could do to an image and not cross the line unto an unethical manipulation?Some acceptable things you could do to an image are change the brightness, tint, contrast, and other basic photo settings. These effects can possibly but don't necessarily change the image's story, they simply make it a nicer and prettier picture to look at.
D. Post the manipulation (this means get that image and post it on your blog) that you think was the most unethical, and explain why you think it was unethical.
I consider this photo the most unethical because the reason it was changed was to tell a story that isn't originally shown. If the school wanted so badly to show its diversity, it could've had somebody specifically shoot one. What they did was desperate and untruthful.
E. Post the manipulation that you consider the least unethical, and explain why you think it is not as bad as others.
I consider this photo the least unethical because the way they changed the photo doesn't alter the story or the meaning, etc. of the picture. The photographer simply distorted the photo a little bit to get the picture to fit on the slender cover of the magazine.
No comments:
Post a Comment