Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?
It is reported that the AP has parted ways with a photographer for editing one of his photographs.
Now, I’m sure that the AP has its rules and regulations and has taken its decision based on these. That’s up to them and it means that those who closely follow news stories can, in theory, be assured that photographic rules have been followed within a certain set of parameters and standards.
But this seems to have set off discussions on various photographic news websites and blogs, around the usual suspects of truth, authenticity, originality and reality in photographic images.
So, leaving aside this particular story, editorial policies and also moving away from news journalism specifically, a few thoughts pop into mind.
One of the great things about an all digital creative workflow, is that – due to all that binary malarkey – once an image has been captured, there is little reason for that image to degrade in any way.
But with an analogue workflow, there are a few extra stages to go through. Each of which can have unpredictable results on a photographic image.
It’s hardly a new discussion, but it seems that the language used on descriptions alongside works of gallery art is in the news again.
I’ve been messing about with film cameras again for about a year or so. The first time for about 15 years.
I had embraced digital photography as soon as I could afford a decent dSLR and, with my results-driven design hat on, the final output ‘quality’ had always been my primary goal.
Apparently a ‘panel’ has “exploded the myth that art and advertising are worlds apart“. Righty ho, that’s that then.
There have been many ‘death of photography‘ type articles of late. Most attributing this to the rise of camera phones – in particular the iPhone.
