Posted on 08/12/2011 11:12:03 AM PDT by DManA
Talk to anyone in my business and they'll all say the same thing: No matter how long you write stories and put them in the newspaper, you are never really sure which ones are going to strike a nerve.
[snip]
Requests for the photo, and use of the story, have come from the Department of Veterans Affairs, military publications, Arlington National Cemetery. Soldiers in Afghanistan have inquired about the photo, including some from the Screaming Eagles of the 101st Airborne Division, stationed at Bagram Airfield.
"I sent a good-sized one to a base in Afghanistan because they wanted to build a memorial to members of their unit who had been killed," Glick said.
This letter, from Atlanta, was typical:
"You have no idea just how much this photo and story mean to so many of us who have served. We do not ask for special treatment; we do not ask for your gratitude; we don't even ask for your patience when we occasionally 'geeze' with old stories. We would like to have some understanding just how much service to this great nation means to each of us. Your picture and story show me that some do understand."
[more at link]
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Semper Fi...
Agree
very nice photo, I couldn’t help but wonder how that girl must have felt.
And it could very well be a composite of 2 photos. And in art, that's fine. The other posters comment about the shadow is also a great observation.
Truth vs manipulation is a common topic with photographers, and many accept some processes as a means to a high impact end. Art.
Mary McHugh on her fiance's grave, Memorial Day 2007
I think its a great photo but it is curious. I checked the roll call for Fort Snelling National Cemetery and the two names on the front headstones, M Leone and Ralph J Nelson are not listed, John C Workman is though.
http://files.usgwarchives.net/mn/hennepin/cemeteries/fortsnelling/
I take it back. The shadow is a bit bigger than the other markers I can discern (it certainly is proportionately bigger then the marker at the closest point in the photo). The angle of the sun and the mist would diffuse detailed shadows of the eagle, and the bulk of the bird would roughly match the bulk of the marker.
It would take a sick man to do this to the widow. Does anyone read the articles anymore?
Noah Miles Pier
Noah, 25, of Charlotte, NC, died while protecting freedom on February 16, 2010 in Marjah, Afghanistan. Born on July 28, 1984 in Fairfax, VA, Noah and his family relocated to Charlotte in March of 1995. Noah was an avid outdoorsman and was involved in the Police Explorers Program at CMPD as a teenager. He loved American Freestyle Martial Arts and earned a black belt rank. Noah fell in love with his childhood sweetheart Rachel, whom he was to marry when he returned home.
Ahem....
And ahem...
Shot this fella while coming back from an airboat ride on Lake Kissimmee in Central Florida.
He is eating an armadillo. Or as we call them, "possum on the half-shell."
This is real easy to put to rest.
He did NOT use a digital camera, he used an old Nikon, which means 35mm film.
Which means 35mm NEGATIVES. At least 60 of them. As far as I know, you can’t alter a negative with photoshop or any off the shelf software.
All he needs to do to put all the photoshop wizards to bed is show the negatives.
Yes, it would. Yes, I did. I recanted my initial claim.
My HP Scanjet scans both negatives and photo paper prints and turns them into digital images which I can then open up in Photoshop and tweak in anyway.
Its a simple process and common process with photographers because many went from film to digital and we like having our old film favorites on our computers.
On this thread, you are looking at a digital image, not a film negative.
Yea, I think it’s real.
I did not see where it stated he used a film camera? Can you point that out? I have 3 "older Nikon" cameras and they are ALL digital cameras, not film. I use all kinds of lenses..even a "multi-purpose" with my digital cameras.
And you have missed my point completely.
I know all about scanning negatives.
But, if he HAS the negatives, they are definitive proof that a photo of an image was actually taken.
You can MANIPULATE an EXISTING negative, but without a camera and an image, you cannot create what does not exist.
The negative proves that an image (non manipulated) existed.
Now,if you want to persist with this conspiracy thingee, he COULD have placed a stuffed bird on the stone and snapped the shot.
Clearly, that is a lawn ornament... A good one mind you...
PIER, NOAH M
LCPL US MARINE CORPS
DATE OF BIRTH: 07/28/1984
DATE OF DEATH: 02/16/2010
BURIED AT: SECTION 60 SITE 9060
ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY
from his obituary: “...
Noah fell in love with his childhood sweetheart Rachel, whom he was to marry when he returned home..”
And what do you consider older? I see this guy and he’s about my age and his Nikon was probably made long before digital was ever offered. Like mine.
I know that nowdays, if a piece of equipment is older than 3 or 4 years, its considered obsolete.
The photos of the women mourning are also very heartfelt, but stir a more tragic emotion. And probably strike a chord more for those of us left behind.
I can see why the soldiers would want copies of the eagle, portraying bravery, honor, duty and America. And not of a wife or fiance crying or resting at grave side.
Thanks DManA.
It’s an incredible image.
I happened to come across it last week and no idea of its origin; am glad to have the info now.
God rest those who have made the ultimate sacrifice. Those of us left behind sill grieve.
Where are you seeing the camera and negatives? I went back to the original article and do not see the photographer with his camera.
The photo of the man on the article link appears to be Jon Tevlin, who is the author of the article. Not the photographer, who was Frank Glick.
ugh...that’s a tough pic to view. God bless this woman.
Very true, two completely different sides of the spectrum.
You’re right. The pictures evoke two very different, but equally valid emotions.
One makes you ask - is it all worth it?
The other answers - hell yes.
I have photos of FG from another source. I have to run right now and don’t have time to bother with photobucke, but the bottom line is this:
One of us is right, at this point, I don’t know which one. If it IS a digital camera, (unlikely) then you may have point. (although that doesn’t mean the image is fake.)
If its a 35mm, then its a settled issue. Negatives don’t lie unless its a stuffed bird.
Sorry I have to leave it hanging right now, but I’ll be in touch!
Have a good weekend.
*
Sad :0(
Beautiful and moving, thanks for posting!
You too Conrado-—FReegards...
I have seen them on beach in Juneau, Alaska
I have seen lots of eagles on the ground eating. Just saw one sitting on a deer on the side of the road, eating it. I assume the deer was hit by a car yet it was 100 feet from road, so either it ran a little before dropping or the eagle dragged it away from road.
Thank you. Fabulous story and picture.
The glow just to the right of the eagle makes it look photshopped.
Glbal Warming! Sad those birds stuck out there on the ice like that. ;)
Been done for years in Hollywood. There are film printing devices that print digital images to film. Forget what they are called, but back in the early 90's a company out of the Midwest made them. Basically you inserted a camera onto the device. It printed whatever electronic image you sent it, onto the film negative. So for at least about 20 years, film negatives have been prove of nothing. The reason Hollywood did this was to splice a few graphically modified images back into a roll of film.
BTW - It looks real to me. Lighting is correct. Shadows are correct. Do not know why there is artifacts around the edges of the feathers, but my guess would be something could have occurred during the film scanning process.
Disclaimer - Never did any production myself. Just kept the equipment running. That film printing device was not my responsibility.
;-)
Dude, I’m cool with you being a photoshop expert et al, but this is one picture that MAY BE photoshopped but at the very least, it doesn’t piss me off and emotionally patriotic...unlike a “birth certificate” waved around by a lying, POS president claiming it to be the real BC months back.
I read the article and the photographer said he took many photos from different angles and that this was the best one. I've seen eagles too, never perching that low and they certainly don't hang around when a human is in close proximity to take the photos "from all angles" that he claims..........
I don't think it's real either.....
In a related article, the photographer said he was following a crow that was flying eratically when he spotted the eagle.
I'm kind of a wildlife buff and if that eagle was indeed there, that crow would have called in a flock of his buddies and they would have tormented that eagle until they drove it out of the county........
I've seen them do that countless times. I'll see a red tail hawk soaring then from out of the nearby woods will come a crow cawing and heading straight for the hawk then before you know it there's a flock of them........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
