Ease of digital photo alteration adds a hurdle for news outlets

International Herald Tribune ^ | 8/14/2006 | Maria Aspan

[Boundless]

> ... why can't they go back to FILM cameras ...

Silver halide photography is nearly dead.
Before long, it will be used only by darkroom
nostalgics, along with daguerreotype.

Plus, negs have zero meta-data to bolster their
authenticity. A digital image from a secure
camera is much more credible than a neg.

Shoot your base scene with a 20Mp DSLR, edit
in Photoshop, print at high-res, re-shoot on
Ektachrome 400, and yer good to go.

The recent scandal was not really about technology
anyway. Some of those frauds were so blatent that
the only explanations are:
- massive editorial incompetence at Reuters
- massive agenda-driven corruption at Reuters

... well, maybe both.

[Boundless]

> Wire services don't want to be in the business
> of spending time ...

Then they don't get to blame the technology, which is
what they are trying to do here.

> The weak link in the chain is the shooter ...

There is a bottomless pit of photo hacks with an
agenda to drive with fake images.

If the news services fail to vet the images, they take
the heat. Reuters has earned the present scorn.

[jwparkerjr]

re: Reuters has earned the present scorn

And then some!

I have no sympathy for any of them. I'm really more familiar with AP having worked in the news photo department of a major daily newspaper. There's a good deal of competition between the big players for members. It's gotten so expensive that a lot of papers have only a single wire service these days. AP really has the edge here in the US since the AP wire is the source for a lot of the stories that are printed and it's much easier to get both the story and the art from one source. When the wire carries a story the point you to any accompanying art. And if the ink-by-tank-truck gods are smiling you might actually find the art where they said it would be. More often than not it's a chore to find the pictures.

But I certainly agree with your observations!

[Brit1]

Don't no about 'Silver Halide is nearly dead'. I use both and until somebody comes up with the quality of my Leica Ms and lenses in digital I will continue doing so as I suspect most people with Leica's will. And if you say what about the new digital M? I bet because of the compromises like still having to use retro focus wide angle lens designs and a limited pixel count it will be worse than an equivalent 35mm film Leica. Ok so in news, sport etc and photojournalism its 'convienient'But when I go out to take a picture I take My MP and a couple of lenses in my pockets

[akorahil]

Fair enough.
Thanks for the explanation.