Monday, December 21, 2009

Ray’s Corner Soapbox – Manipulation Again???

I received a feedback today about the old manipulation post I did sometime back.  The post came from someone who is definitely NOT a blogger or a blogger within the group.  I include the post:

“lori said...

photo manipulation is unethical if you work for a newspaper, newsletter, magazine, online news org, etc. It's unethical if you're altering content that should not be changed. National Geographic and Time Magazine front page photos should not be altered. Military pubs, though steep in propaganda, should not manipulate, either. As for personal photos, manipulate till your heart's content.
December 20, 2009 9:31 AM”

Well, lori, I gave you the benefit of the doubt by posting your comment (Freedom of Speech isn’t always free).  No where in my post did I indicate that a PROFESSIONAL photographer should manipulate photos.  As a matter of fact, most of the magazines you mentioned require the submission to be in RAW format.  Why??  The publisher may make adjustments to the picture for the best lighting and clarity of items covered within a shadow. (Usually referred to as the “bottom line” or money in the pocket.)

The reason I almost deleted this post message was the next to last line.  I am retired military and do not know what publications she is referring to.  The line is basically a political one, stated on personal thoughts and not on fact.  The political nature of the statement is the reason I will no longer post any comment that can be taken as a political statement.  There are plenty of smutty blogs in cyberspace she can use for politics.

The last thing about accepting a post is to ensure there is an email address with it.  Lori’s was a “no-reply” email address so I could not ask her any questions or request she change her post.  I include an email address….is it my “real” email address?  It is not the one I have from my ISP but is from Google (Gmail). Anyone can get a Yahoo, MSN, AOL, etc FREE email account and still  remain “anonymous”.

That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it.

Should a woman who puts on lipstick, blush and eye shadow be called “manipulator”?  What if I were to shave my beard off?  Is that manipulation?  LOL


  1. Yes, there is a thin line to be walked here on this topic. I may post some thoughts on this topic as well later. Goes back to the age old question...what is art??

  2. Go for it, Ray! And "manipulate" your photos. The "artist" in us photographers is honor bound to display the feeling and atmosphere of the shot as well as the subject. Gosh, you can crop off the edges of a picture, you can remove the telephone pole from someone's head -- that is done to make the picture resemble what you saw when you took it. Your eye doesn't see that telephone pole or the garbage can off to the side, but the camera records it. My very best picture of Suzy shows her and her mobility scooter in color against a black and white gloomy atmosphere. Did I manipulate the photo? You bet! Did I make it reflect what I saw that gloomy morning? Yes! Was I lying or misrepresenting? No!Go for it!

  3. Lori ignores the fact that for years, in darkrooms, photographers performed many of the same types of procedures that she calls "manipulations" long before any publisher ever saw the photo. To me, there is a huge difference between enhancing a photo and manipulating one.