Greetings,
For the blog entry this weekend: post a link to an altered photo; explain what has been altered in the photo, what the purpose of this alteration is, and argue whether or not the alteration is benign or poses an ethical problem.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
http://www.barkbiteblog.com/2008/06/now-theyre-sayi.html
ReplyDeleteThis Alteration is either an alteration to make Justin Timberlake's..... speedo contents, more filling or less obvious to the audience, the alteration is in question though it is confirmed there IS an alteration somehow.
This alteration is unnecessary, but is too minor to cause any kind of ethical dilemma, and although I am unaware of Mr Timberlake's situation, I feel it is insignificant for a cameo appearance on a movie that BOMBED.
http://www.modelmanagement.com/blog/library/uploads/MADONNA-PHOTOSHOP3.jpg
ReplyDeleteIn this photo, you can obviously see that the alterations made on Madonna was to make her look not as old. They removed her wrinkles, saggy skin, and smoothed out any imperfections. They also brightened up her face and body so the photo won't look dull like the original photo.
Photo shop was necessary for this particular photo because the original photo was not appealing at all and its actually kinda scary.
http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2006/08/reuters.html
ReplyDeleteIn the altered picture, the smoke that rose from Lebanon after Israel had bombed the city, was much thicker than the real effect of the missile. The altered photograph wanted to make the attack seem more severe. After complaints, the picture was removed from Reuters. The authors of Reuters apologized and said that a new, corrected, version would be posted. The new picture showed smoke coming from Lebanon, but it was not as thick; the smoke showed the real effects of the attack. The photographer was suspended for a short time.
http://beautifuldecay.com/2009/09/22/altered-realities-bad-for-human-health/
ReplyDeleteIn this picture it shows a before and after picture of Jessica Alba. She looked fine before the alterations, but with them portrays the image of her features altered in ways that a lot people prefer to look. It can be viewed as just small adjustments to modify the picture but the article about it is saying that it is delivering an unhealthy "reality" for humans.
http://www.ministry-of-information.co.uk/blog1/keiramanip.htm
ReplyDeleteIn these pictures, Keira Knightley's appearance has been tampered with. These changes include the size of her chest and waist.It seems to me that the purpose of this alteration is to make her fit better into a sort of synthetic Hollywood standard for women's bodies. Although the changes aren't horribly drastic, I think this is an ethical problem. Manipulations like these draw a clear picture of how obsessed with appearance our culture is. A person shouldn't need to be tweaked for their acceptance in society.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11313738
ReplyDeleterecently in the news, there has been peace talks between the president, and the leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Palestinian leaders and the prime minister of Israel when they began to re-launch peace talks. Al-Ahram, an Egyptian newspaper altered a photograph taken at the white house by placing Mr Mubarak (the leader of Egypt)ahead of US President Barack Obama while all the leaders were walking down a red carpet. the original photograph had Mr. Mubarak on the side and the President leading the group. although this seems like a small and insignificant change,this altered photograph has brought a lot of responses from the world. it seems to be that this photograph in unethical because it changes a vital truth of the situation. President Obama was leading the peace talks and not Mr. Mubarak. the newspaper should have mentioned the alteration in the caption, because otherwise they are printing false information. a picture is worth a thousand words, and they should be the right words that support the truth of the event the photo is representing. in response to all these attacks the newspaper has drawn a retraction and has reprinted the article with the original photograph.
http://www.elistmania.com/still/20_female_celebrities_before_after_photoshop/
ReplyDelete(#16)
these before and after photos of Penelope Cruz display subtle changes that one wouldnt normally detect unless you held them next to each other. For example, her hair is originally unkept and frazzled from the rather powerful fan being blown at her from behind the camera. Then she is transformed to have beautiful sexy hair that never frizzes and is always (seemingly) hydrated, always doing what she wants it to. Also, there is the matter of her skin, which is originally shadowed and her outlines more pronounced. Then, suddenly, her skin is fresh and clear, she seems more alive and bright, and every previous flaw is vacant.
I viewd this as an unnecessary photoshop because it only makes the public believe that there are such a thing as people with perfect skin and hair. It blinds readers to the truth of the matter, that the models are human and flawed just like us. Also, the model looked fine before the alteration. All it did was make her look more unreal. It was one example of an ethical problem.
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/rnc1+2.jpg
ReplyDeleteThis photograph depicts a soldier facing a t.v. with a message on the t.v. saying "Our soldiers are watching and our enemies are too." In the original photograph, the solider was actually watching "How the Grinch Stole Christmas."
I feel that most political attack ads are altered in some way in order to make the ad more appealing. I do not agree nor disagree with this ad, because all political parties of some affiliation do it. This is a prime example how voters need to be educated on the issues, and how easy it is to persuade a voter to vote one way over another.
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/SAobserver1.jpg
ReplyDeleteMarch - 2006
This image is a cover page of a San Antonio Newspaper showing a police officer with a Ku Klux Klan hood on. They were trying to exemplify how there are racist police officers on the force.
Although this is very controversial and offensive, they definitely got their message across.
I don't think it was a good idea for them to do this, because the police officer who's image was altered was not happy. This was a very harsh way to say that some police officers are racist. It is attacking police officers as a whole, instead of the small percentage that may be racist.
http://allieiswired.com/archives/2010/04/britney-spears-candies-before-after-photoshop/
ReplyDeleteIn the photo of Britney Spears it is clear that she is altered in both pictures for the better. In the first her body and legs were slimmed down and skinner then the first picture and any bruises were taken off. In the second picture the photo is also altered by takin out tatoos and making her backside smaller than it is in the orginal picture. Today in society celebrities are put under so much pressure being pushed to look a certain way or else it isn't excepted and obviously shown by the before and after pictures changed. Photos today bend the truth making it seem there are people in the world who look a certain way but its wrong. Society is being pushed into looking "perfect", a look that's not exsistent.