The large image of Condi is the original the smaller one below it has been "retouched" by someone on photoshop, so that she is supposed to look possesed. It isn't very good in my opinion but it is relevant and definintely something that would be done today. It really is cruel and has a very mean intent. But that is what the misuse of ethics can lead to when you use photoshop for the wrong reasons.The other pictures below hve been photoshoped for artistic purposes.
These are photos taken by Scott Kelby who sticks to his claims that he is a strict ameteur and has no "stake" in selling his photos. Therefore he says he has absolutely no "photoshop ethics" nor does he need them. Kelby says that, "whatever makes the picture look good hanging on the wall is cool." He is the editor and publisher of Photoshop User Magazine, Layers Magazine (the how to magazine for everything Adobe) and the President of the National Association of Photoshop Professionals (NAPP)
2 comments:
I liked the photos you have choosen because the colors are very bright. That is what drew me to your blog. I have to agree with you about the retouch on the photo of Condi, it is better, but what happen to ethics?
yeah - I like the quote you have; art is art, and practically anything goes (there are still questions of good taste and crossing moral boundaries), but journalism is an entirely different matter - Condi Rice is a public official, and the public should be entitled to trust the pictures they see of her; this is a very unflattering and "mean" picture anyhow, not that I'm a fan.
Post a Comment