kegtapr Posted July 15, 2006 Posted July 15, 2006 CNN isn't altering the photos anymore than FHM, Stuff, People, The Enquirer, or any other mag. You just can't trust anyone these days. 723379[/snapback] While true, I don't see the others trying to be a leader in international news.
Gary M Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 Kelly Holcomb doesn't. 723337[/snapback] Ouch. Dead nuts.
Chef Jim Posted July 16, 2006 Posted July 16, 2006 And if you blow up the picture, the guy in the foreground isn't plugging his ears, he's holding some bizarre, unidentifiable square blocks against his face. 723305[/snapback] In blowing it up you can see he's talking on a cell phone. His right hand is holding the cell phone up to his ear and plugging his hear with his right. So he is not plugging both ears due to the noise of the cannons. Probably his wife giving his **** for being late for dinner again.
Puhonix Posted July 17, 2006 Posted July 17, 2006 it's fake, the dude is standing in front of a screen......duh someone should be able to take it apart........I just dont want to put forth an effort..... 723346[/snapback] I expected this from the hamster....
MattyT Posted August 8, 2006 Posted August 8, 2006 Saw something on Slashdot so I thought I'd post an update: This photographer was apparently staging and manipulating photos. Reuters withdraws all photos by Lebanese freelance Another: The Unluckiest Multiple Home Owner in Beirut Another: A Bridge Too Weird Another: http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/184206.php
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 8, 2006 Posted August 8, 2006 There's two other guys in the lower right corner in the background...if relative size is any indication (and it is), there's not too much distance between fore- and background. That's not a very deep field; looks to my eye like the f-stop on that exposure was about 0.75... Plus...the lighting looks pretty oddly discontinuous between foreground and background. Could be as a result of focus...I don't know, all my photography experience is at a considerable distance (like thousands or millions of light years ). And as far as I know, there shouldn't be THAT much difference in contrast across THAT little depth of field. Plus...it looks like the guy in the foreground is plugging his ears against the noise of the cannons behind him. Except...the two guys in the background, closer to the cannons, aren't. They're actually pretty clearly engaged in a conversation. The guns aren't even firing. And if you blow up the picture, the guy in the foreground isn't plugging his ears, he's holding some bizarre, unidentifiable square blocks against his face. Plus - and here's the real kicker for me - that's pretty clearly Israeli artillery in the background. Israeli military units take a very dim view of photographers crawling around their neigborhood snapping photos of them. Virtually the only picture a photographer is going to get of Israeli military units in the field is going to be a blurry one. For that reason alone, I'm disinclined to believe an AP photographer got close enough to snap a sharp picture of a soldier closely affiliated with the unit, even though the unit itself is blurry in the background. More likely it's a manufactured photo (not necessarily by AP - hell, the Israelis could have done it themselves), with the guy in the foreground inserted to add visual interest to an otherwise blurry shot. 723305[/snapback] NO ONE stands in front of a 155mm howitzer before firing. No one.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 8, 2006 Posted August 8, 2006 NO ONE stands in front of a 155mm howitzer before firing. No one. 738009[/snapback] Oh, come on Joe...you never pulled the old "I think it misfired...look down the barrel and tell me what you see" gag on the new guys?
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 8, 2006 Posted August 8, 2006 Oh, come on Joe...you never pulled the old "I think it misfired...look down the barrel and tell me what you see" gag on the new guys? 738043[/snapback] As much as i'd have loved to with my NCOs, no.
stuckincincy Posted August 8, 2006 Posted August 8, 2006 Published photos are copyright protected if so asserted by the photographer. Publishing them and/or modifying them without permission and/or fee is actionable.
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 Saw something on Slashdot so I thought I'd post an update: This photographer was apparently staging and manipulating photos. Reuters withdraws all photos by Lebanese freelance Another: The Unluckiest Multiple Home Owner in Beirut Another: A Bridge Too Weird Another: http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/184206.php 737975[/snapback] Yep he was busted... http://news.yahoo.com/photo/060808/481/287...406935a6a231ea8
crackur Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 I expected this from the hamster.... 723803[/snapback] apparently hamsters are usually right durr for u!
/dev/null Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 CNN isn't altering the photos anymore than FHM, Stuff, People, The Enquirer, or any other mag. You just can't trust anyone these days. 723379[/snapback] Problem is CNN is supposed to "reporting" the news which means their photos should be genuine The Enquirer only doctors photos because there are no known photos of Jesus, Nostradamus, and the Greys at any Nazi rallies FHM and Stuff don't need realistic photos either because most of their pictures are used in fantasies anyway
Recommended Posts