LA Times Photographer Fired for editing pictures!!

BruinEd03

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,399
1
0
LA Times

<<Editor's Note
On Monday, March 31, the Los Angeles Times published a front-page photograph that had been altered in violation of Times policy.

The primary subject of the photo was a British soldier directing Iraqi civilians to take cover from Iraqi fire on the outskirts of Basra. After publication, it was noticed that several civilians in the background appear twice. The photographer, Brian Walski, reached by telephone in southern Iraq, acknowledged that he had used his computer to combine elements of two photographs, taken moments apart, in order to improve the composition.

Times policy forbids altering the content of news photographs. Because of the violation, Walski, a Times photographer since 1998, has been dismissed from the staff. The altered photo, along with the two photos that were used to produce it, are below:

[photos...click on link above to see them]

Photographer Brian Walski used his computer to combine elements of the two photographs. The left side of the altered photo is taken from the top left photo, and the right side of the altered photo is from the top right one. Some residents on the left side of the blended photo are visible twice. The altered photo ran on the front page of the Los Angeles Times Monday. >>

wow...I can't belive an actual photographer did that (being one myself). Not that it was much...but still the lack of integrity!! Really disheartening to see people do this in the profession :(

-Ed
 

NewSc2

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2002
3,325
2
0
Originally posted by: BruinEd03
LA Times

wow...I can't belive an actual photographer did that (being one myself). Not that it was much...but still the lack of integrity!!

-Ed

why did he do it anyways? to make the scene more dramatic or something?
 

chiwawa626

Lifer
Aug 15, 2000
12,013
0
0
Yeah i see its photochopped, but how did it really effect the interpretation of the photograph?
 

BruinEd03

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,399
1
0
Originally posted by: NewSc2
Originally posted by: BruinEd03
LA Times

wow...I can't belive an actual photographer did that (being one myself). Not that it was much...but still the lack of integrity!!

-Ed

why did he do it anyways? to make the scene more dramatic or something?

he took one picture...and merged it with the other...to improve "composition". Which is an ethical violation unless the photo is for a photo illustration or explicitly says that it has been altered.

-Ed
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
167
106
Originally posted by: chiwawa626
Yeah i see its photochopped, but how did it really effect the interpretation of the photograph?

As far as I'm concerned, it didn't, but it's still better to have a policy like that in place to insure that something truely interpretation altering doesn't happen.
 

BruinEd03

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,399
1
0
Originally posted by: chiwawa626
Yeah i see its photochopped, but how did it really effect the interpretation of the photograph?

It basically lets you see the soldier's face better and to make it a little more dramatic. While it may not seem much it is an ethical violation and hurts the journalistic integrity we journalists try to maintain.

-Ed
 

BruinEd03

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,399
1
0
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: chiwawa626
Yeah i see its photochopped, but how did it really effect the interpretation of the photograph?

As far as I'm concerned, it didn't, but it's still better to have a policy like that in place to insure that something truely interpretation altering doesn't happen.

It hurts insofar as the credibility of the newspaper is hurt.

-Ed
 

weezergirl

Diamond Member
May 24, 2000
3,366
1
0
i don't really get why he did it either..it doesn't seem to "improve the composition" or whatever..at least enough to warrant doing it! oh well sucks for him
 

BruinEd03

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,399
1
0
Originally posted by: weezergirl
i don't really get why he did it either..it doesn't seem to "improve the composition" or whatever..at least enough to warrant doing it! oh well sucks for him

it improved in the fact that u can see the soldier's face + his actions (waving hand) and also the guy carrying the kid at the same time.

-Ed