On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:22:12 -0500, Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have to agree with Shel on this one. Is manipulation that does not change > the meaning of the photo evil? How about those millions of "grip and grin" > photos your have seen in the newspapers over the years, every one of them > posed? Yes, photos can lie. Reporters can lie. Editors can lie. But their > leaving something out that is not relevant to the story is not a lie, it is > just ordinary editing (cutting the irrelevant).
Tom, I'm not sure if you're responding to John or me here, but I just want to go on record as saying that manipulation is not evil. I don't believe that I've ever said it is. I have only said that I choose not to do it for myself. That's a personal choice, and whatever anyone else chooses to do with their photos is fine by me. I make no value judgements on such activities. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
