| Joined: | Wed Apr 18th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4186 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
I just want to adress the example of the B&W photo with the fairies, which can hardly be called manipulation but would be considered Creative use of the media.
As I understand it, Manipulation can be a blatant lie with grave repercussion as a result, specially when security forces are involved, yes, I do know of an incident where the photog got into a Hefty dispute where he was accused of causing an upset ,when luckily he could produce a color slide .
Documentary is about showing what is outthere, nothing more, nothing less.
I would still regard the fairies photo as manipulation. It presumably involved the overlaying of two glass plate negatives in the darkroom. That’s not really any different to masking an area and pasting in another image in Photoshops “lightroom”.
Graham can also tell the stories of touching up glamour models…….or rather photographic transparencies of glamour models ….back in the 60s.
However, the key point is neither of these examples fall into the documentary category.
Howard Carters photos of Tutankhamen burial chamber could have been easily ‘manipulated’ by photographing the chamber after all the gold had been removed. “Sorry guys it had been plundered long ago”…..and the people involved took their silence cut of the spoils.
Documentary photography has always relied on the integrity of the photographer. It’s just that today there are easier, foolproof ways of manipulating images….and fewer people with integrity, when integrity is needed.
Last edited on Mon Mar 4th, 2024 09:12 by
____________________
Eric