"Look a how mean/distasteful/condescending/dumb/Other-Side he looks!"
You can generally tell a hit piece, lately, by the photo which accompanies it.
As a junior baby wannabe amateur photographer, I will tell you that I delete the portraits that I take which make my subject look bad. If I'm taking a candid shot of an event, I only keep the unflattering ones if the subject is doing something which I don't have another shot of, and the real subject is the action.
Photographers covering a newsworthy event with talking heads take a LOT of pictures of those talking heads. While it is not unethical for a news photographer to publish an untouched photograph of what happened, it causes me to wonder about their objective journalism, when they ONLY publish photos of the subject with his or her face in an unpleasant expression.
As a junior baby wannabe amateur photographer, I will tell you that I delete the portraits that I take which make my subject look bad. If I'm taking a candid shot of an event, I only keep the unflattering ones if the subject is doing something which I don't have another shot of, and the real subject is the action.
Photographers covering a newsworthy event with talking heads take a LOT of pictures of those talking heads. While it is not unethical for a news photographer to publish an untouched photograph of what happened, it causes me to wonder about their objective journalism, when they ONLY publish photos of the subject with his or her face in an unpleasant expression.
We ALL can get caught momentarily with our face in such expressions.
Oh, and don't try to make out that it's only The Other Team that does this. Your team is just as bad about it.
Labels: competition, Gripes, news, One Nation, Politics, Tribalism
posted by Matt G @ 3:04 PM
5 Comments:
Another semi-pro photographer here. I always tell people "Photographs don't lie. Photographers, on the other hand..."
A photograph is a frozen moment in time and if you're patient and thorough, you WILL find the moment that tells the story you want, no matter what it is and how it relates to what most observers would say really happened.
Back in Reagan's day, the photographers at Reuters' Washington DC bureau had a solid POTUS Nosepick File. This was a fat wad of prints, immortalizing the many moments when our Chief Executive had been busted with his fingers mining around up his nose.
The fact that none of these ever saw the light of day is proof of something bad. Your opinion on what, exactly, is probably as valid as mind.
Yes, indeed. I agree with you, I carry a little card with me, which I can give out on the street. It says >> Any photograph from me you're Grandmother will approve of << and my name and contact.
Especially if you're doing street photos of children.
If you look on your google startup page in the morning you will see your first manipulated photo of a scene.
The other thing I do before reading anything is to see who the author is and who and what he works for. For instance, yesterday in the Bangkok Times have syndicated pieces from the New York Times,>> NYT reads to me >> Ignore do not read this trash.
It pays to carry around in your mind the picture of the [olar bear having a ride on the lttle ice float always,
I arrived here from Raconteur. Paul Scott New Zealand.
Yep, they DO seem to go after 'specific' folks, don't they...
Great post.thank you so much.
Post a Comment
<< Home