Photo manipulation has been around almost as long as photography itself, but as digital imaging hardware and software has both advanced and come down in price, the practice of digital image manipulation has become much more commonplace and faked photos are becoming harder to detect. In fact, digital photo manipulation -commonly referred to as 'photoshopping'- has recently become a popular pastime, and many consider this photographic fakery to be a new art form. But when it works its way into photojournalism and the media, the issue of ethics comes to the forefront.
How far can we take digital image manipulation and still maintain journalistic integrity?
 |
| The idea of the right hand side photo is to make the subject appear more sinister. Times Magazine admitted having manipulated the picture |
(...) feminist legislators in France, Britain and Norway say, and they want digitally altered photos to be labeled. In June, the American Medical Association adopted a policy on body image and advertising that urged advertisers and others to “discourage the altering of photographs in a manner that could promote unrealistic expectations of appropriate body image.”
 |
| Take the case above, where GQ magazine featured a digitally slimmed photo of actress Kate Winslet. Upon seen the cover, Winslet complained that the retouching was “excessive.” “I don’t look like that and more importantly I don’t desire to look like that. I can tell you that they’ve reduced the size of my legs by about a third,” said Winslet. |
 |
| The photo above shows a digital composite of a British soldier in Basra, gesturing to Iraqi civilians urging them to seek cover. The photo was published on the front page of the Los Angeles Times shortly after the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. Brian Walski, a staff photographer for the Los Angeles Times and a 30-year veteran of the news business, was fired after his editors discovered that he had combined two of his photographs to “improve” the composition. |
This is not to say that we should get rid of Photoshop, a valuable design tool. The problem is what to do with the tool, how to use it wisely.
What do you think?
I will close this comment this Sunday @ 11pm.
MILEYKA CAMAC
ReplyDeleteAs this post says Photoshop is a very important tool for profesionals who knows how to use it. In my opinion, the using of this software becomes unethical when violates the rights of the person who is gonna be expose in a public media. Even worst when there is a sign contract and the journalist, in this case, doesnt follow what the contact says. Manipulation of photographs to make business is not right. Even when the journalist thinks that his is doing a good job with photoshop making look better the person who will be published, they are only making it to sell more and the consumer like it. I think we are part of this issue as well, because by purchasing this kind of fake publicity we are supporting everyday to this companies that in a good or bad way they are keeping us informed about what is happening in the world.
MILEYKA CAMAC
Rubin Edwards I truly feel that some photos or ducuements needs enhancing for the right purposes,although so many criminals,or con-men use of photo imagining is for the wrong reasons,Yes-its can be good or NO-it can cause serious harm to some people.
ReplyDeleteConsumers are constantly getting shot with the perfect man and women pictures in magazines, TV shows, news paper and every person wants to look their best, that’s why a lot of men and women star dieting or using the dieting products and supplements. There is not such as thing as perfect person, but advertising companies make us think the contrary. They always put images of ideal woman perfect hair, wonderful skin color, ideal weight, but in real life this person don’t look like that, is just an ideal idea of the person that is creating her through the magic of software. I agree with feminist legislators in France that they should label the pictures that have been retouch for the enchantment thought Photoshop and all this software. Magazines’ designers, photographers’ are creating fake images of how humans should look. Moreover pictures direct affect the health, and mental stage for those that are growing up such as adolescents or those who doesn’t have a clear image of themselves, that’s when a simple picture it can develop in a very serious disease like bulimia or anorexia. People tries to archives goals that are not design for a human such as, a body 80 points for a girl that is 6.0 height, here are some real statistics of the effects of retouch pictures; 40-60% of high school girls are on a diet, 50% of girls between 13 and 15 years-old believe they are overweight, 80% of 13-year-olds have dieted, Up to 24 million people of all ages and genders suffer from an eating disorder. It is not a strong reason to stop the fake world and star to realize that we are beautiful just how we are. Is it not a motive to say not to retouch photos?
ReplyDeletePhoto manipulation is photographers’ job. This is what they learn to do. When a photographer has a picture, he has the ability to manipulate it and makes it the way he wants to make it. Photoshop is a business like any other businesses. Photographers need to do it, so they can please their customers. However, Photoshop becomes a moral problem when it reaches the media or a journalist. The media should not publish a photo until they make sure that photo is similar to the original one. This is the media’s job to verify anything before they publish it. However, many times the media acts immorally. They deceive us. They persuade us to do whatever that pleases them. Let’s take tobacco for instance; they persuade us to buy it even though they know that this product can contribute to many of our health’s problems. We all know that the media plays an important role in our society. They are the one who informed us about many things that happen around the world. Many of us depend on them to inform about things that happen around us. Therefore, the media needs to take its responsibility when it comes to inform the public.
ReplyDeleteAnything we see displayed on magazine covers or in television, from food, to the flawless faces of models have been "enhanced" to look good so the general public will be persuaded to buy their products. This is Exaggeration (in advertising) which according to the book means: The process by which advertisers can mislead their audience by making claims unsupported by evidence. It's as if you've nipped/tucked without the need for recovery time. But when does it cross the lines to becoming immoral. In my opinion, I think it crosses the line to violate a person and becomes immoral when the person is Photoshopped without previous known consent or photo shopped to the point where they are unrecognizable. Also when it misleads the public to think that this is how the ideal perfect specimen should look and that everyone and everything must be perfect.
ReplyDeleteI feel that "photo shopping" an image would only be ethical if you are either photoshopping a personal image of yourself or if you give permission to someone to photoshop the image of yourself for you, with you having the rights to your picture and knowledge of the use of it with consent. Photoshopping images has become notoriously known for manipulation and causing problems, whether politically, judicially, or personally. Take for example the "Benetton united colors un-hate campaign, which shows leaders like Pope Benedict XVI and Barack Obama kissing each other and other men on the lips. No matter the reason for their campaign it is morally wrong of them to portray these images without the person's permission. Media has a freedom of speech but I don't think that it should go as far as to change perspective of people by editing real images and making them become fakes images for their favor or amusement. It is ethically because in editing photos you. Might be doing wrong to people or someone with that photoshopped image in numerous ways. By doing so the people are being treat as a means to an end. According to Kant, this would be ethically wrong.
ReplyDeletePhotoshop images is sometimes ethical when it is consented by the person in the photo and when the photo is being honest, which is almost never. Also, when trying to benefit from the photo by convincing the audience that it is true. Sometimes photoshop imahes can possibly be ethical when sending a positive message, not a message that will affect society and cause feelings to be hurt. For instance, the picture of O.J. Simpson shows that his freedom was already taken from him. The picture might have been the illustrator's feelings or it may be a way to manipulate people into believing that O.J was guilty. With that being said, photoshop images can be used for the wrong reasons unless it is being used for fun.
ReplyDeleteTo me photoshop is a software that is used to enhance regular photos to make them more commercial. Their also a side to photoshop that very unethical which like the picture above with the soldier and the iraqi.There's many ways to make photos like that seem harmful to any good cause or make someone look or seem to be doing something that they are really not doing. Also there's a form of photoshop that allows you take any document and scan it and alter it to say whatever you need it to read and since it's a document it look real and no way to tell if it's fake. So basically just like evrey thing that can be used to steal or cheat and at the same time help is that depending how one uses it.
ReplyDeleteNordy Perez said...
ReplyDeletePhotoshop is used for many reason in todays society. Many people use photoshop and very day more and more people learn to use it for their own needs. It just depends on what those reasons are for which you decide to use photoshop that make it ethical or not. It also depends on how much you are manipulating the image. If you use photoshop to enhance an image but not physically change it so much to the point that it looks completely different i see nothing wrong with it. For example when you as the photographer see somethings as a hierarchal element in the image that you took and you would like for everyone else to see you may enhance the image so your audience may see what you see. By highlighting your point of focus or defusing everything around it without changing the image to something it's not. Unfortunately in todays society that is not the case as we can see in the few examples on top given to us. It is not ethical when you manipulate an image so much to completely create something that does not exist. I can see how photos can no longer be evidence in a court because you can manipulate an image to see something that was never true. The problem is not photoshop the problem is the way society is today we want to create a world that does not exist. To make actors better looking as if they are perfect or OJ make him look more sinister. For me what makes it ethical or not is the reason in which you're manipulating the image and how far are you willing to go.
Some people use photoshop as a hobby but some use photoshop as a tool for their career and profession. Its what they do and love and all they have known is how to enhance photos. Some advertising is more attractive if you strip it down of all its gimmicks, and it usually catches the buyers eye because they aren't used to that simplicity. Advertising, with magazines and celebrities has become a huge controversy with some celebrities, with the example of Kate Winslet she would've rather not been altered and in magazine cover model Heidi Klum didn't want the editors to photoshop her teeth because the close-up showed one tooth bigger than the other and she wanted to show the real her.
ReplyDeleteThe editing of these pictures isn't ethical when companies are messing with perceptions. Little girls believe it’s the norm to be perfect and tall and thin when in reality there are barely people like that especially their role "models." Although it is to the benefit of the company to advertise their product to the max they are then giving their audience the wrong idea, I will not look like Jennifer Lopez if I put on that lipstick, that mascara, and that blush.
On the other side of the argument, businesses have to be aggressive and get the audiences attention and if its selling a product in a biased way, then they're gonna do it and it doesn't matter what others have to say. But maybe they should get a clue and realize what they're doing if now models and celebrities are against being photoshopped into something they're not.
Many at a young age start messing around with photoshop and realize what can be done with it. This generation does know how advertising is rigged and are conscience that this isn't real.
Photoshop is a necessary tool for photo enhancing in the pothography industry. I think there is nothing wrong with that if it used with consent of the person that is being exposed. It is wrong or inmoral when people in this industry over alter those pictures creating a false prototype of beauty perfection; people see pictures of artist or model in magazines that are altered and they will try to get this fake image causing them to fall in deceases such as bulimia and anorexia for example.
ReplyDeleteLuis C Sanchez
ReplyDeletePhotoshop is a necessary tool for photo enhancing in the pothography industry. I think there is nothing wrong with that if it used with consent of the person that is being exposed. It is wrong or inmoral when people in this industry over alter those pictures creating a false prototype of beauty perfection; people see pictures of artist or model in magazines that are altered and they will try to get this fake image causing them to fall in deceases such as bulimia and anorexia for example.
Photoshop imaging is sometimes ethical when it is consented by people in the photo and when the photo is being honest, which is almost never, especially when professional employees in magazine corporations are topnotch in editing taken photos. Photoshop can be used in a good and bad way, but magazines uses it for the worst due to the fact that they want to catch people that walks in store, supermarket lanes, and other places to make profit. Thou, it is not right due to the fact Photoshop changes photos and in regular people eyes we are thinking we are seeing the truth but really we’re seeing the unseen. Photoshop imaging is expressing the wants of people and the thriving of what people want to look like, which is lowering people esteem. Photoshop isn’t a bad thing; it’s on how it’s used. It should b used in a nice honest legal way where its fun.
ReplyDeleteYesenia Luis says: Photoshop is an useful tool for correcting minor flaws on a picture. But when you post a picture that is unrealistic because of the incorrect use of Photoshop is a problem. This is false information that's being transmitted to the public and not only that but it perpetuates a fake reality. Models are Photoshopped to make them look perfect and many girls believe in this and struggle to attain the perfect figure. It is inmoral to play eith reality just to make a profit.
ReplyDeletePhotoshop is indeed a wonderful tool for editing and correcting pictures. But people usually tend to find a way to manipulate tools in such a way that makes them a moral problem. I think that it is fine for a photographer to use this program to fix minor issues on a photo...lighting etc. But when they use completely different bodies on celebrities, it makes many people feel self conscious about themselves because they strive to look as "perfect" as the people in the photos. When in reality, the people in the altered photos do not even look like that themselves...and that's what I find immoral concering this subject.
ReplyDeleteJournalism is supposed to be facts and informing the public about real events going on around them. Articles written and showing examples by photographs that are photoshopped are rigged, we aren't being given all the facts and journalism is fooling us and we're falling for it. Journalist try to make their story the top one and you get to the top by fooling others but you're not only fooling other journalist but also the public. The public is easily manipulated by what they read, see, and hear. Time magazine is known for most of their covers and those covers the pictures aren't taken and directly put to print. Such as the famous blue and red obama picture. Why didn't the just print the original one? They try to get the most attention by placing red and blue the colors that interest the public, the American public. They are misleading the public between what's real and what isn't. There isn't any point in this because they aren't literally selling the story, we buy out of the story when we see such pictures that falsely portray the certain situation. Let the public voice their own opinion, don't create their opinion for them and don't make them believe what you want. And as for advertising, products are purposely placed to encourage and lure the public in. Once again, we shouldn't buy into these things this is the exact reason why they have product placement and why they choose celebrities to endorse products.
ReplyDeletePhotoshop is a smart editing program that you can do basically anything with. I know this because I was brought up using this program and I'm also certified. You can use filters that turn photos into clouds and even making this it look like clay. You have unlimited uses fo this program, but when you start to make things fake and not reality that's where it becomes unmoral to put up an act. Its not right to change someone size or even change up the scenery. Things like that should be discussed and agreed on before if it is wanted to be done in the first place. The other thing the should be messed with is the brightness if not at all.
ReplyDeleteI think there is nothing wrong with Photoshop until you violate someones consent or you make someone look totally different from themselves. For instance, Kate Winslet on the GQ magazine.Photoshop is a software that everyone has the access to, but the wrongness of this software is when you make changes to a photo that is detectable. The reason for this is because you are displaying something that doesn't exist.
ReplyDeleteRaquel Miller
ReplyDeleteI think that Photoshop can be sometimes good and unethical at times. For instance, the picture with Kate winslet on the magazine covers. According to the text, Winslet complained that the retouching was “excessive.” “I don’t look like that and more importantly I don’t desire to look like that. I can tell you that they’ve reduced the size of my legs by about a third,” said Winslet. I thought that if she did not like the picture they could have used another instead of that one. I think that they should not make people look a certain way if they do not want to be like that with out permission. I also think that it is good because it makes the pictures look good. But it can also send out wrong messages causing the audience to want to be like them. This in some cases can not be good at all.
Photoshop is a great program that can be used to enhance and give affects to pictures. The problem occurring now a day is that they are not only enhancing the picture but making it false. This may not seem like a big issue but when it goes on a cover of TIME MAGAZINE and millions of people are seeing this false image, it becomes a problem.
ReplyDeleteThis “photoshopping” can also become an ethical issue. If you do not have consent of the person that you are photoshopping it can most definitely have a negative effect on a person. For example the picture that is posted on this blog of the colored women that in the first picture seems more plump is then enhanced to give the image that she is a few pounds lighter. What if she did not want to look like that? I understand that this can be used for business to capture the attention of the public, but my concern is to at least be moral about it.
It is amazing what photshop can do. It can be both right and unethical. one reason why it is unethical is because someones image can be altered and portrayed as a negative image. For instance the was an american solder halting an iraqi citizen but it was photoshopped and they artist made it look like the solider had the gun pointed towards as the iraqi citizen which can cause a racial dispute against two cultures. Photoshop is a good tool when using it in the marketing tool because it enhances the look and feel of a picture for example Mercedes-benz is promoting the new CLS63 AMG and they blur the surrounding in the picture to give it the fast feel. This topic is very controversial at the end of the day because it has positive and negative aspects depending on the viewers perception of the image.
ReplyDeleteMarcus Sussman
ReplyDeletePhotoshop is used everyday of our lives. The media uses it, people use it for their Facebook pics, ever realtors use it to liven up a house that they are listing. However the case at hand is, when is it ethical to use Photoshop? If used in the wrong way, it can cause an uproar amongst differant cultures, such as what the editor did with the soldier picture. In my opinion, Photoshop shouldn't be used by the media, as hardly any good can come out of it.
Just like any other computer program or software are designed with the intent to facilitate in the workplace, photoshop was created with the purpose of adjusting and enhancing little details of pictures so whatever the product may be, persons or things, that is going to be sold to the public look attractive for the consumers. The unethical part of the use of photoshop comes when people give a wrong message to the public or media through the pictures created, because once a picture is photoshoped is not real. Give the wrong message to the public is called manipulation, because only by lunching a picture to the media is easy to get many different meanings about one same picture. Also like in the example of Kate Wislet, by photoshopping her image they portrait a totally different image about her, that is not close to how she really is. Is not only about sending the wrong message to the community is about the rights everybody has about their images. Yes is fine to make some arrangements but not a drastic change of one or two photographs. I think this is very unethical to do and even more for a professional, there should be laws that reinforce the use of photoshop the same way there is laws for copy right, trademark and so on. We should also keep in mind the bad use we give to other programs like facebook, tweeter, internet itself, word, scanned documents, etc
ReplyDeleteYes Photoshop can change the way someone looks so they seem more attractive and more appealing, but this should be obvious to the public who admire and who are fans of these celebrities and models. Is there wrong in how celebrities want people to perceive them? There is wrong when Photoshop is used to distort the reality and make innocent people look as if they're criminals. If people want to look like those people in the magazine covers, they should already know that that's not how they truly look.
ReplyDeleteKarla Huari
ReplyDeletePhotoshop itself is not a bad thing. It is what people do with Photoshop that can make it a moral dilemma. In photography, programs like photoshop can be very useful, such as to fix lighting and small mistakes. It is when photographs are completely altered, to the point where the original and the edited version are so different, that it is immoral. When ads are promoting a certain diet and the image of the current popular celebrity is so edited that it doesn't even look like her, it is unjust to consumers. It is a blatant lie. Moreover, most of the photoshopping is done in popular magazines where young girls are forced to look at unrealistic images of the female body. That is not what the average, healthy American woman looks like. Photoshop is taken yo an even higher level when photos like the one of the soldier in Iraq is faked. I don't necessarily oppose Photoshop, I'm against some people's abuse of it.
There is nothing wrong with photo shop.The problem with it is deception. There should be some sort of disclaimer somewhere even in fine print that the images were edited.The media has such a negative influence on self image in society. The perfect nose, the perfect eyes, the perfect lips, the perfect bone structure, the perfect ears-all of those are nothing but make up and photo editing. No one can have the perfect face or body. It's impossible. Society doesn't realize that. They are bought by these deceptions. Its devastating to know that teenager commit suicide due to low self esteem issues, caused by the media in the first place; trying to look like the model on last month's issue. Who are they anyway to set a universal standard of beauty-a false one in fact?
ReplyDeleteJessica Jean-Baptiste