Photoshop: What's Appropriate
Quick mention of something sent along by a friend here in Macon:
This is from the NY Post, a publication I’m not in the habit of reading — but nonetheless a good catch. Altering photographs like this for magazine use, even CBS’s internal magazine, are beyond what Photoshop’s for, I believe, when it comes to people — or anything, for that matter.
For the record, nearly every photo I take runs through Photoshop at some point — especially now that I’m using a camera that shoots RAW. Altering things like exposure and color temperature are standard practice.
Further, I’ll often do a smidgen of “touch up.” Telephone/power lines, dust, something in someone’s teeth, zits — all often get removed in Photoshop. But there’s a line that, for me, rests well shy of altering an image’s character — and making someone twenty pounds thinner definitely crosses that line.
When it comes to photography, I’m more artist than journalist, I guess, but still feel like I have to respect some of journalism’s rules to get “authentic” photographs. What do you think? It is worth following some “rules,” or is this sort of alteration okay?
TrackBacks: 0
Posted by Giles, Wednesday, August 30, 2006, at 10:00 AM.
Posted to Book cover photography | Ethics | Photography | Whatever
Comments:
It’s too late to still be trusting photographs, or journalism itself - especially when the primary purpose is publicity rather than reporting.
And remember, manipulation has always been part of photojournalism since the days that Matthew Brady dragged some bodies around and switched hats for his Civil War photos.
I do think photo editors for publications that still pretend to be doing reporting should hold themselves and their photographers accountable - not for “absolute truth” but for a level of trust that the photographer is primarily recording events rather than constructing a story.
I think that when it comes to journalism nothing should be touched up. We expect to get the accurate and unbiased truth from the news media.
But when it comes to in-house promo or sales/pr type stuff I’m a bit more forgiving. We expect them to sell us stuff and influence us in their direction. That’s their job.
So for billboards I’ll forgive a layered mask tummy tuck, but for the cover of Time, Newsweek or my Sunday paper, it better be all real.
This is a perfect example of how PS shouldn’t be used and the way mass media perpetuates the American ideal of the “perfect woman.” Her body and facial features have been dramatically changed to make her look thinner: smaller neck, thinner arms, and torso. At the request of a client, removing a few wrinkles and blemishes are fine. But this is a healthy woman in the photo on the left.
This country is so obsessed with losing weight! You’ll see many of these demonstrations in the fashion and beauty industry … and it’s just wrong. The NY Post and its employee(s) who made these changes should be questioning their ethics a little more.
If you believe the media, everyone (except you) is perfect. Wouldn’t it be nice if people were portrayed as they actually are? That almost certainly would help prevent women from killing themselves trying to be thin.
Apologies for some bad wording on my part — this wasn’t produced by the Post, only mentioned in it (and, now, about a hundred other places today).
The image(s) were produced by CBS.