Photo Editing – an intermission from GB&U
February 13, 2008
For this post I’m going to give my opinion on editing photos for photo journalists. The usual theme will resume in the next post.
(America Ferrera aka Ugly Betty)
I know that is a magazine, but it’s an excellent example of photo manipulation. Manipulating your photo is basically altering it from its original form in any way. This is a highly debated issue and a relevant one for anyone involved in journalism or the media. It got heated in our class when we discussed it.
Personally, I’m against it. I agree with our teacher Roz when she said fixing certain things in the photo because of “poor technique” is probably okay. I think it should also be a last resort. For example if you are shooting in dark or light conditions, or have the picture a little crooked and that is the only shot you have, lightening the overall picture or straightening it out could be acceptable.
However, where do you draw the line? And we have to remember our task. We’re not out there taking these pictures to get a beautiful shot, or to make art. We’re trying to tell a story and show actualities to people who can’t be there themselves. Being an art photographer and a photojournalist is completely different and people need to refrain from blurring the line.
So what if the picture would look better if such and such was missing? Removing things is taking away from the truth. Also, little details count. The flower had dirt on it in real life, why remove it? Besides from aesthetic reasons, is there any good reason? No.
And if we completely manipulate a photograph like getting rid of the dust in a storm so you can see the soldiers better, we’re creating a moment in time that never happened. Those soldiers were fighting in dust. We have to show that because it’s the truth. Our interest isn’t perfection, it is the story.
Every detail counts.
