Award-winning photographer dumped for altering single Syria image

[Marko]

Award-winning photographer dumped for altering single Syria image | Media | theguardian.com

Did the photographer go too far?
Did the Associated Press go too far?

Yeah I got opinions...do you?

[theantiquetiger]

The photographer went too far (IMO). The AP set a standard for images and the photographer broke the rules. The video camera in the frame does hurt the image, making the scene not as powerful as without the camera in frame.

The photographer should have just bypassed this image, and not manipulating it into a more powerful image.

[Runmonty]

As it is represented "photojournalism" and is held out as such, then yes he went too far and the AP were justified IMO.

Just like journalism shouldn't be about altering or manipulating the facts to embellish a story, likewise altering an image in this way is taboo. But I acknowledge I am perhaps just naive and idealistic.

If it isn't being represented as photojournalism or a factual recording of the actual scene, then manipulate the bejeezers out of it and in it in any way you like.

[Yisehaq]

Mmmm! couldn't tell exactly. The video camera doesn't seem to be destructing the image overall. In fact, it could be overlooked very easily.

IMHO, as long as the manipulation of the image doesn't involve directly the main characters, removing distracting elements and cleaning up the image should be fine.
I have to say AP got to far as the manipulation didn't damage the news or tell the wrong story.

[Marko]

Here's my take - People can manipulate how ever they want when it's personal work....but when it's commercial work and you sign a contract you have to live by the contract.

"AP's reputation is paramount and we react decisively and vigorously when it is tarnished by actions in violation of our ethics code," Lyon said. "Deliberately removing elements from our photographs is completely unacceptable."

Now I'm a curious dude and often meticulous about the language I use when i write anything....so I'd like to see the contract or the clause he broke, but I have no doubt it exists. And because he deliberately broke the contract....yup he should be sacked.

Something else that's curious from the story is this:

That revelation led editors to examine all the 494 photos by Contreras that AP had transmitted during his tenure and, when possible, to compare them to the original data file held by the photographer.

Why wouldn't it be possible to examine ALL the original data....or did some of the data go missing? This of course is speculation.
Buuuuut in this world where so many people are liars.... often when liars get caught they continue lying. This guy says it's the only photo of 500 that he cloned stuff out of.... Maybe - maybe not.

The temptation to make better and better photos through software is very very high these days and this photographer made a terrible decision when he broke the contract he signed.

[Anuj]

I completely agree with yisehaq. camera was in that scene just for a few seconds which i dont think changed any of the events unless ofcourse u r into chaos theory and butterfly effect than u can counter argue. that being said, a contract is a contract and is legally binding. one may argue on penalties though?

regards
anuj