Uh-Oh... alleged photo manipulation!
/forum/topic/791194/0

end

justruss
Registered: Jul 05, 2004
Total Posts: 3156
Country: United States

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2009/07/fakery_in_the_times.shtml

http://www.metafilter.com/83061/Ruins-of-the-Second-Gilded-Age#2639106

"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



This image is copyrighted by the owner




Credit to photo comparison goes to Adam Gurno @ http://updates.gurno.com/?q=node/20


Harry Hoffman
Registered: May 04, 2009
Total Posts: 352
Country: United States

You can see the lowers stairs run into each other.



shatterkiss
Registered: Sep 30, 2004
Total Posts: 3894
Country: United States

PDN's been following this.

http://www.pdnpulse.com/2009/07/new-york-times-magazine-withdraws-possibly-altered-photo-essay.html



Micky Bill
Registered: Nov 25, 2006
Total Posts: 2058
Country: N/A

Two questions come up in my mind.

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...



justruss
Registered: Jul 05, 2004
Total Posts: 3156
Country: United States

Update:

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."



mdude85
Registered: Apr 12, 2004
Total Posts: 4275
Country: United States

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.



RDKirk
Registered: Apr 11, 2004
Total Posts: 8626
Country: United States

This would be a bad time to be W. Eugene Smith.



Micky Bill
Registered: Nov 25, 2006
Total Posts: 2058
Country: N/A

RDKirk wrote:
This would be a bad time to be W. Eugene Smith.



why? please explain...



RDKirk
Registered: Apr 11, 2004
Total Posts: 8626
Country: United States

Micky Bill wrote:
RDKirk wrote:
This would be a bad time to be W. Eugene Smith.



why? please explain...



Because his work would be considered manipulation today.



end