Photo editing.
Mar 13, 2024 14:40:55 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
.
...the feather pile is now 8 pages deep...
...the feather pile is now 8 pages deep...
Just for future reference, the depth of the "feather pile" is on each and every page so there is no need for you to
waste time and space mentioning what is blatantly obvious to everyone.
Also for your edification, a primary goal of this type of group is to spark enough on topic interest to promote viewer participation so ads can be sold for profit. Not sure telling everyone what is already marked on every page is in the spirit of the group. BTW, the feather pile is now up to page 10 and counting.
Mar 13, 2024 16:00:27 #
Professional photographers edit their photos photography police want to make it a crime
Mar 13, 2024 16:15:53 #
brentrh wrote:
Professional photographers edit their photos photography police want to make it a crime
There's no crime involved here. There are publications who want to maintain their photojournalistic ethical rules. Professional photojournalists do have restrictions on how they can edit their photos.
Mar 13, 2024 16:40:43 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
There's no crime involved here. There are publications who want to maintain their photojournalistic ethical rules. Professional photojournalists do have restrictions on how they can edit their photos.
I think we all know that but...it's a photo of a MOTHER AND HER CHILDREN. Lighten up people.
Mar 13, 2024 18:03:05 #
EJMcD wrote:
I think we all know that but...it's a photo of a MOTHER AND HER CHILDREN. Lighten up people.
It was a photo of a mother and her children presented to the media and the public to demonstrate that the mother was in good health. That the photo was photoshopped calls the honesty of that demonstration into question.
Mar 13, 2024 19:53:22 #
Mar 13, 2024 20:04:24 #
brentrh wrote:
The crime is restricting photographers right to edit his work
Nobody is restricting anybody from editing their photographs. The problem is presenting an edited photograph as fact.
Mar 13, 2024 21:00:06 #
Old Coot wrote:
She probably already is a member
If so, I hope she stays away fro the attic!
Mar 13, 2024 21:07:38 #
Mac wrote:
Nobody is restricting anybody from editing their photographs. The problem is presenting an edited photograph as fact.
I am confused. As I understand it, this was a Mother’s Day picture of Kate Middleton with her three children taken by her husband. Was it intentionally given to the press by the royal family as proof of her health and well-being or did the press just latch onto it?
Mar 13, 2024 21:10:57 #
Mar 13, 2024 21:30:26 #
rcarol wrote:
I am confused. As I understand it, this was a Mother’s Day picture of Kate Middleton with her three children taken by her husband. Was it intentionally given to the press by the royal family as proof of her health and well-being or did the press just latch onto it?
Kate had abdominal surgery and had not been seen publicly for some time.
. https://time.com/6899819/kate-middleton-appearances-surgery/
Mar 13, 2024 22:05:16 #
Mar 13, 2024 22:17:57 #
brentrh wrote:
The crime is restricting photographers right to edit his work
You're kidding, right?
Are you a CG_Canon wannabe?
Mar 14, 2024 08:26:02 #
Mac wrote:
Nobody is restricting anybody from editing their photographs. The problem is presenting an edited photograph as fact.
Personally, I could not care less about that. Since I'm a father to 4 and grandfather to 9, I have a great respect for Motherhood. I'll respect your opinion if you respect mine. Leave the woman alone. Do we know who "presented it" to the media?
Mar 14, 2024 12:41:30 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.