"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >From: "Mark Roberts" > >> Here's an interesting editorial from ZoneZero about the controversy. It >> includes all three of Schneider's disqualified photos, both in their >> original and altered versions: >> http://www.zonezero.com/editorial/octubre03/october.html > >Thanks Mark. >I didn't mean to pick on Schneider specifically, his name just came up >before anyone elses on a Google search when I went looking for examples, and >his manipulations are somewhat less objectionable than others I have seen. >Journalistic integrity doesn't stop with the photographer, it goes all the >way up the food chain in the industry. >It's the industry as a whole that has an integrity problem, not just a few >photographers who got caught and then were made examples of.
My impression of Schneider from his talk was that he's definitely a "good guy". He was much less angry and much more philosophical than I would have been in his circumstances! (Especially just days after the event.) One thing that *wasn't* mentioned in the article I referenced was that one of the reasons his photos were disqualified from the contest (and this really is all about an awards contest, more than claims of deliberate deception or misrepresentation) was that the prints he submitted to the contest were *different* from the ones actually printed in the newspaper. That is, they were from the same RAW file but had different Photoshop processing. This strikes me as a slightly more legitimate basis for disqualification, but not much: You can't expect realistically the same brightness/contrast/color balance to work for both newsprint reproduction and a gallery print (which is basically what photog's submitted for judging). -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
