placemark bump
Geesh...
You know, this is so blatant I wonder if the photographer/editor did it on purpose to expose Reuters. Seriously, I or my 14 year old can do a better job by far than this and we've only got Jasc's PSP.
Professional opinion ping
Gee, would they photoshop smoke in Israel to make it look worse then it is too?
Rooters is a joke. I would trust nothing from them. Not even sports scores.
Another photo by same photographe,Adnan Hajj, on Yahoo News Photos, in case you eagle eyes can spot a pattern on this one too.
Reuters should put in a little more time and try to take some pride in their work. This is a poor effort.
The plumes don't seem to match what would be the air flow pattern.
The left plume seems to be the main source -- rising with a slight left to right air flow pattern.
So, where did the middle and right patterns originate? The air flow from the left plume would not create the center plume. The center plume would have had to rise from a source to the right of the main plume source.
As the main (left) plume would rise, it would be continuous as it spreads out in the upper right portion of the image. It would not crease a standalone plume (middle) to its right.
I wonder how soon we will see this story on TV?
/sarcasm off
Two can play this game...
"Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon."
I guess that means they can make up whatever they want! Now it all makes sense.
"And that's the way it is. Beirut in flames. Innocence and hope murdered by the IDF. Dan Rather, CBS news reporting. Courage!"
ping....
No surprise here .. the media has been doing this kind of crap for years
LA Times' apology for altered war photo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/883094/posts
Can anyone find a photo of that scene before the smoke? There looks to be a lot of duplicate buildings, but maybe they just have unimaginative architects.
The general rule is; be highly sceptical of any report(now days this includes photographs) emanating from a war zone. Especially a report from one of the belligerents or their close allies. The warring parties are attempting to move neutral public opinion in their favor. (Example, England during WWI.)Also, there can be good reason for misinformation such as concealing military moves, potential or on going. Quite often what is not said is more important than what is in fact being claimed. That being said the smoke does appear 'funny!'