Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photography Business
Truth In Photography
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Browncoat" data-source="post: 221297" data-attributes="member: 1061"><p>It sounds like you're advocating that photographs advertise the level of editing they've received. I made this for you:</p><p></p><p></p><p>[ATTACH]59822[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p></p><p>There is no truth in journalism, and that is a fact. You can not place the value of truth on <strong>perception</strong>, because your reality is not my reality. You can not reasonably assume that any series of events that unfolds before your eyes will be seen the exact same by everyone else. I'm taking some liberty here, because obvious false reporting accompanied by fake photography is out of bounds by just about any standard...but even that is not all-inclusive.</p><p></p><p>Any reporter/journalist is conveying their interpretation of events based on what they saw, witnesses they have interviewed, and laced with their own values, experience, and personal agenda. Look at the stark contrast of any major event that is covered by every news source simultaneously and this becomes very transparent.</p><p></p><p>A photographer is no different, even photojournalists and military photographers. On the battlefield, one photographer may choose to photograph our side being shot up and slaughtered when in fact they have strategically won the battle. The accompanying news story is written by an anti-war protester fresh out of college who's father was killed in WWII. Another photographer on the same battlefield chooses to capture the victory and comradarie of the troops, and a completely different story is written. Which is real journalism? Which is real photography?</p><p></p><p>No one has answered my questions.</p><p></p><p>Why is it important to you that edited/altered/digital/composite photography be branded with some kind of a label or disclaimer? There have been a lot of opinions posted about how people feel it's important that this label exist, but why?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Browncoat, post: 221297, member: 1061"] It sounds like you're advocating that photographs advertise the level of editing they've received. I made this for you: [ATTACH=CONFIG]59822._xfImport[/ATTACH] There is no truth in journalism, and that is a fact. You can not place the value of truth on [B]perception[/B], because your reality is not my reality. You can not reasonably assume that any series of events that unfolds before your eyes will be seen the exact same by everyone else. I'm taking some liberty here, because obvious false reporting accompanied by fake photography is out of bounds by just about any standard...but even that is not all-inclusive. Any reporter/journalist is conveying their interpretation of events based on what they saw, witnesses they have interviewed, and laced with their own values, experience, and personal agenda. Look at the stark contrast of any major event that is covered by every news source simultaneously and this becomes very transparent. A photographer is no different, even photojournalists and military photographers. On the battlefield, one photographer may choose to photograph our side being shot up and slaughtered when in fact they have strategically won the battle. The accompanying news story is written by an anti-war protester fresh out of college who's father was killed in WWII. Another photographer on the same battlefield chooses to capture the victory and comradarie of the troops, and a completely different story is written. Which is real journalism? Which is real photography? No one has answered my questions. Why is it important to you that edited/altered/digital/composite photography be branded with some kind of a label or disclaimer? There have been a lot of opinions posted about how people feel it's important that this label exist, but why? [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Business
Truth In Photography
Top
