The power of manipulative photography..

[ZUL]

Well Derian and Mauvais I'm sorry for posting a NSFW link. I guess I didn't realize that is wasn't cool to do. I'll refer to the TOS.


And why should I care if two posters and a moderator are overreacting to a comment that was made in a cynical thread titled: How thick do you have to be???

 

[Derian]

Cheers re the NSFW.

I guess the reason that you might want to care is that established posters and moderators watch new people closely to gain an impression of them and decide whether or not they want to discuss anything with them.

 

[ZUL]

I understand, but doesn't it seem even a bit pretentious to judge someone on one post?

 

[llantwit]

I just judged you by the pic you posted on this thread. Seems quite a reasonable thing to do to me.

 

[Paul Russell]

The Daily Mail got caught a few years ago doctoring a photo of Michael Jackson with his kids. As far as I can remember they either combined two photos or Photoshopped one pic to make a more effective image.

Trouble was they were Reuters pics, and Reuters have rules against that sort of thing.

 

[Derian]

I understand, but doesn't it seem even a bit pretentious to judge someone on one post?

Two initiating posts (then the follow up 'wanker/troll type ones) & a caption competition in the photography forum The latter's more of a judgement thing though - I don't suppose you'll be flamed for it. Not bad going when you've only got 24 posts to date though

 

[llantwit]

The statue of Saddam Hussein being 'spontaneously pulled down by Iraqi civilians' to mark 'the end of the war' is a good example imho.

Here's a screen cap from the TV coverage we all saw (all very close up with NO wide angle shots at all in the coverage I saw). I remember it well - there were just pictures of what looked like a frenzied mass of celebrating people:

And here's a wide-angle pic of the square at the moment of this historic moment that Rumsfeld publicly declared was like 'the fall of the Berlin wall', and about which Blair shed tears of pride:

Robert Fisk: "A statue of Saddam Hussein was pulled down on Wednesday, in the most staged photo-opportunity since Iwo Jima."

Link to Information Clearing House article on the controversy:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2838.htm

 

[llantwit]

Two initiating posts (then the follow up 'wanker/troll type ones) & a caption competition in the photography forum The latter's more of a judgement thing though - I don't suppose you'll be flamed for it. Not bad going when you've only got 24 posts to date though

Don't feed 'em, mate.

 

[Derian]

Don't feed 'em, mate.

KK.

 

[ZUL]

LOL, point taken...

 

[llantwit]

KK.

Bloody hell Derian! You're doin' it again - confusing a poor ole' little net hick with yer advanced webspeak. I had to look that up on wikipedia!

 

[Derian]

Bloody hell Derian! You're doin' it again - confusing a poor ole' little net hick with yer advanced webspeak. I had to look that up on wikipedia!

<does same> Soz, I didn't mean to imply you were a Mongol military leader


even though that might be justifiable given the forthcoming wales forum invasion on london *taps nose*

 

[kerb]

what a random derail

oh, almost forgot why i am here.
now i heard that shit was 'manipulated' because when the photographer was in nam he saw her walking down the street but missed the shot and asked her to walk down again so he could compose it




disclaimer: the fact of this point my not be entirey accurate but i remember talking about it with someone so...i could be very wrong

 

[llantwit]

even though that might be justifiable given the forthcoming wales forum invasion on london *taps nose*

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

 

[Paul Russell]

That doesn't sound very likely!

I was going to say earlier, that for every "iconic" image that comes along there always seems to be a rumour that it was set up.

What I read about this image (or it may be the image of the man getting shot in the head from close range -- Edit: Eddie Adams' "Street execution of a Viet Cong prisoner, Saigon" -- I can't remember), is that the original shot shows that on the left are a load of other photographers lining up to take shots, which was cropped out of the final image.

This may be complete rubbish!

oh, almost forgot why i am here.
now i heard that shit was 'manipulated' because when the photographer was in nam he saw her walking down the street but missed the shot and asked her to walk down again so he could compose it




disclaimer: the fact of this point my not be entirey accurate but i remember talking about it with someone so...i could be very wrong

 

[boskysquelch]

Jus to make sure you know fer sure in future...http://www.vietnamwar.com/phanthikimphuc.htm

That doesn't sound very likely!

 

[Derian]

Jus to make sure you know fer sure in future...http://www.vietnamwar.com/phanthikimphuc.htm

Cheers Bosky. I for one didn't realise that the photo had earned Ut a Pulitzer prize.

 

[Paul Russell]

Know what for sure?

Jus to make sure you know fer sure in future...http://www.vietnamwar.com/phanthikimphuc.htm

 

[Wilson]

what a random derail

oh, almost forgot why i am here.
now i heard that shit was 'manipulated' because when the photographer was in nam he saw her walking down the street but missed the shot and asked her to walk down again so he could compose it
disclaimer: the fact of this point my not be entirey accurate but i remember talking about it with someone so...i could be very wrong

the photographer was vietnamese

 

[boskysquelch]

I was attempting to provide your obtuse vision with a more acute focii.

How you choose you do what you do with your brain is upto you.

That doesn't sound very likely!

I can't remember

This may be complete rubbish!

Know what for sure?

 

[boskysquelch]

the photographer was vietnamese

contextually ::so what?


mkay...deep breath.
1. Typical troll_age frum the Hollage...yy'all fell ferit suckas!!!

2.Berger and Sontag basics,,,images aren't manipulative...the words people further ascribe to them are. Images are a construct whaddeva...how words then make the observer consider those images are things to consider manipulative combined with the societal experience of the observer and the position of authority empowered by the viewee who in turn provides that authority to the presenter of that image.

Some say this began with the codecs of early post Medaeval art...some site specifically The Raft of the Medusa by Gericault as the beginning of this phenomena....and then to put this in the context of THIS Thread the origination of this debate can be found in the work of Matthew Brady and his colleagues...I go with that this was being done back in the days of Ur and Babylon....and rediscovered with the Romans and then the Xtians (see icons...Jesus LOL!)



Oh how ironic(sic & sick).




Aye thanku(Arth Askey styleee) and g'night!


*I'm off out on me bike to find dead things to photograph.

 

[Pie 1]

Frank Hurley (photographer on Shackleton's Endurance) was pretty nifty with the old manipulation techniques.

This one titled 'Cheering the relief boat' was in actual fact the boat leaving them, not returning to rescue them He also apparently added a sky from another picture to add drama.

He was appointed as a war photographer during WW1, but got the boot due to his 'creative' talents

 

[llantwit]

contextually ::so what?


mkay...deep breath.
1. Typical troll_age frum the Hollage...yy'all fell ferit suckas!!!

2.Berger and Sontag basics,,,images aren't manipulative...the words people further ascribe to them are. Images are a construct whaddeva...how words then make the observer consider those images are things to consider manipulative combined with the societal experience of the observer and the position of authority empowered by the viewee who in turn provides that authority to the presenter of that image.

Some say this began with the codecs of early post Medaeval art...some site specifically The Raft of the Medusa by Gericault as the beginning of this phenomena....and then to put this in the context of THIS Thread the origination of this debate can be found in the work of Matthew Brady and his colleagues...I go with that this was being done back in the days of Ur and Babylon....and rediscovered with the Romans and then the Xtians (see icons...Jesus LOL!)



Oh how ironic(sic & sick).




Aye thanku(Arth Askey styleee) and g'night!


*I'm off out on me bike to find dead things to photograph.

Fuck me. I've read Sontag and Berger (and Barthes, and, etc, etc...), and that sounds like utterly impenetrable nonsense.

 

[boskysquelch]

Fuck me. I've read Sontag and Berger (and Barthes, and, etc, etc...), and that sounds like utterly impenetrable nonsense.

You don't try to read my stuff do you?FFS!!!!

 

[llantwit]

That's where I went wrong, is it?

 

[Paul Russell]

Eh?

When I said

"That doesn't sound very likely"

I meant that the post above about Ut asking the girl to do it again cos he had missed it first time doesn't sound very plausible, to say the least. As the poster acknowledged.

Agreed?

When I said

"I can't remember

This may be complete rubbish!"

I was referring to something I'd read about either the Ut or Adams photo -- about the original having other photographers in it, which was subsequently cropped.

As I read it on the Interweb, I guess it was probably rubbish, and I was wondering if anyone else had some hard facts.

I fail to see how the link to the web site about the woman in the UT photo provides any information about that.

I guess I must be obtuse!

I was attempting to provide your obtuse vision with a more acute focii.

How you choose you do what you do with your brain is upto you.

Quote:


Originally Posted by Paul Russell


That doesn't sound very likely!

I can't remember

This may be complete rubbish!

 

[Hollis]

Many thanks for your feedback guys.. contrary to the squlchy bullshite/slander I was not trolling, but have made use of some of your examples.. I hope you weren't all telling porkies.

 

[Paul Russell]

Well, if you need a quote, according to Joel Sternfeld “photographs have always been convincing lies".

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1165870,00.html

Many thanks for your feedback guys.. contrary to the squlchy bullshite/slander I was not trolling, but have made use of some of your examples.. I hope you weren't all telling porkies.

 

[Paul Russell]

http://www.paulrussell.info/gallerysea/17.html

 

[Kameron]

Like this one may be?