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 ...
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.
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.