[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lying with pixels



Ms. Knoer is exactly right: photos have been manipulated and retouched since
the invention of the medium. Digital techniques merely make it easier, and
add new tools to the workbench.  On the other hand, traditional photography
left obvious physical traces of trickery (as Jaeger's example demonstrates).
The danger of digital deceit is that it leaves little or no incriminating
evidence. And what's worse, those telling alternate and rejected takes, that
can provide so much context, are typically deleted.

Thomas J. Wood
Archivist
Archives/Special Collections LIB 144
University of Illinois at Springfield
P.O. Box 19243
Springfield IL 62794-9243
217-206-6520 | wood@uis.edu | http://www.uis.edu/~lib-arch

[Massive and shameless copyright violations follow]:

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Jaeger [mailto:markj@OMNI.CC.PURDUE.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 12:32 AM
To: ARCHIVES@LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU
Subject: Re: lying with pixels


Ah yes, and there is the famous Robert Capa photo, taken during the
Spanish Civil War, showing a Republican soldier in the act of getting
"shot." Alas, it too was exposed as a fake when alternate "takes"
of the photo later surfaced showing the same soldier being "killed"
several times over.

Regards,

Mark D. Jaeger
Purdue University Libraries
Special Collections

"Can a 'literal truth' be established upon a fundamental falsehood?"



On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Susan Knoer wrote:

> Cal Lee wrote:
> 
> > "Seeing is no longer believing. The image you see on the evening news
> > could well be a fake¯a fabrication of fast new video-manipulation
> > technology."
> 
>   Hmm...old news.  Brady photographed a dead soldier form one side and
called him Confederate and from the other side of the field and called him
Union.   Hearst staged Pancho Villa's raids for film crews.  I have a lovely
wedding portrait of my grandparents, done after he died  with faces from
pictures from before they ever met.  Claudette Colbert always had her neck
airbrushed in, and old Playboys airbrushed things out.  Hitler never did the
two-step dance you see in clips, it was manipulated film.  Lange's "Migrant
Mother", the most famous photo of the Depression, had the subject's thumb
removed.  And who ever saw FDR in a wheelchair?  And of course the Edited OJ
cover.
>   "The camera never lies" only applies to wrinkles and blemishes (unless
you have an airbrush).  Computers just do it a little better  (though I've
yet to see believable computer animation...but maybe it's the Turing Test,
and I wouldn't know sufficiently good animation).  But we're not as
skeptical of images as of words; I suppose we've all manipulated the latter
but not many the former.
>   But a good justification for archiving originals!  I've seen a few of
the undoctored Stalinist photos, so someone archived the originals
somewhere.  
> 
>  PS- is Lawyerwannabes Inc the holding company for Dewey, Cheatem, and
Howe (PSC)?

A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List!

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to listserv@listserv.muohio.edu
      In body of message:  SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
                    *or*:  UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to archives@listserv.muohio.edu

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems?  Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <rschmidt@lib.muohio.edu>