"This actually is (or should be) a major embarrassment for the NYT. The simple mirroring could almost be forgiven, but the photographer decided to get cute and photoshop in a few stray boards propped here and there to distract the eye from the perfect symmetry. It might seem a minor thing, but I think there really serious issues of journalistic ethics at stake here." --from the metafilter link
1. Why does the NYT hire a Portuguese photographer based in London to shoot half built houses in the US? They don't have anybody in the US left since Vincent LaForet split?
2. WTF does the "long exposure" and 'I don't do digital manipulations' mean?
Somebody is lying or someone is not telling the truth...
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/behind-5/
"A reader, however, discovered on close examination that one of the pictures was digitally altered, apparently for aesthetic reasons. Editors later confronted the photographer and determined that most of the images did not wholly reflect the reality they purported to show. Had the editors known that the photographs had been digitally manipulated, they would not have published the picture essay, which has been removed from NYTimes.com."
Well he still has images from the project up on his website, no doubt some of them altered (I think at least #6, #15, #25, #45)
Interestingly, the image in question (#27) appears unaltered from the photo that appeared in the NYT. Micky Bill wrote:
1. Why does the NYT hire a Portuguese photographer based in London to shoot half built houses in the US? They don't have anybody in the US left since Vincent LaForet split?
These photos weren't commissioned for the NYT only -- they have appeared in other news outlets for the last year and a half or so.
