New York Times Publishes Edited Photo

[Crazed Rabbit]

As of this posting, the edited photo is on their site:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/27/world/27morale2.html

The Photo:
http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/27/world/27morale2.650.jpg

Now where does that mic cord go?

Crazed Rabbit

[Vladimir]

Hmm, it really peaks the imagination ~;p. What's the deal with the waist down shot? Not like I'm complaining but if we have the rest, we can put her in the Babe Thread. :2thumbsup:

[Reverend Joe]

Now where does that mic cord go?

Crazed Rabbit
I don't know. I also have no earthly idea what they would want to edit out of a picture like that.

Osama maybe? :shrug:

[yesdachi]

There was probably a little sign there that said something positive about Bush, and they couldn’t allow that to be printed. :smug:

[Divinus Arma]

It seems that with modern technology, we can no longer even trust what we see. In some ways, that is a positive. If people are less trusting of visual imagery for news, then they will be forced to digest written information. That will mean more people will rely less on "entertainment" news. With computer animation becoming more and more powerful, we are almost taking a step back in time for free speech. Back to the days of pre-photography, when news and imagery was all text. I want people to be suspicious of the media. The media, after all, are not politically neutral though many seem to think the media are neutral.

[Ronin]

loool....it isn´t even well done!

the NY Times could at least spring for some photoshop classes.

[Xiahou]

Wow, that's just a terrible edit.... :no:

My guess is that they didnt like the mic cord hanging the the middle of the photo, so they just edited it out- you can still see the path of the cord was when they erased it. Not so insidious by itself, but what is disturbing is to see how caviller they seem to be about editing photos in general.


loool....it isn´t even well done!

the NY Times could at least spring for some photoshop classes.It's what they could be editing that we dont notice that's really unsettling...

[yesdachi]

It seems that with modern technology, we can no longer even trust what we see. In some ways, that is a positive. If people are less trusting of visual imagery for news, then they will be forced to digest written information. That will mean more people will rely less on "entertainment" news. With computer animation becoming more and more powerful, we are almost taking a step back in time for free speech. Back to the days of pre-photography, when news and imagery was all text. I want people to be suspicious of the media. The media, after all, are not politically neutral though many seem to think the media are neutral.
I remember in my History of Photography class in college we got to learn some of the dirt on some civil war photos where the photographer dragged (Photoshop the old fashioned way~D)more dead bodies and cannon balls into view for a more dynamic and shocking photo. Pictures tell a thousand words and sometimes 999 of them are lies.

[drone]

Looking at it closely, it looks like the US flag patch on the one guy's arm was edited in. He's the only guy with a RWB patch that I can see, and the patch looks like it falls until the swath that got edited. Not familiar with military regs on this, but it also looks like the flag is backwards. Maybe these guys aren't really US soldiers?

[orangat]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/27/world/middleeast/27morale.html?ex=1156737600&en=0ee4da479e421a4d&ei=5087%0A

"Then the dancers, in revealing outfits, energetically performed dance routines that were more rousing than most Super Bowl halftime acts — wardrobe malfunctions notwithstanding — but far less provocative than Las Vegas shows. At one point, one of the Angelz sang Lee Greenwood’s song “God Bless the USA,” a veritable anthem for many of the troops."

[orangat]

Maybe the picture of the revealing outfits was too risque or put the marines in a poorer light?

[Mithrandir]

I don't see why they didn't just publish the original :

https://img208.imageshack.us/img208/3953/27morale2kopiejp4.jpg

[Vladimir]

There's something wrong with you. :inquisitive:
















:laugh4:

[Mithrandir]

Aww common!
I did not do an hours' worth of research and editing for one lousy reply! I want some controversy! Be offended being a native american, cowboy, policeman, construction worker or hairy legged overweight singer!

~;).

[Duke of Gloucester]

Thank you, Mithrandir. Made my day.:laugh4:

[Gregoshi]

Simply brilliant Mith. :laugh4:

We certainly do get a lot of funny material from the Village People. We should make them honourary Org patrons.

[yesdachi]

Aww common!
I did not do an hours' worth of research and editing for one lousy reply! I want some controversy! Be offended being a native american, cowboy, policeman, construction worker or hairy legged overweight singer!

~;).
I found your work to be as good if not better than that of the NY Times, that’s why (queue the music) I’m on my way to the… Y – M – C – A!
:indian_chief: :cowboy: :bobby: :builder2:

[doc_bean]

I don't see why they didn't just publish the original :

https://img208.imageshack.us/img208/3953/27morale2kopiejp4.jpg

Now THESE are some guys you don't want to mess with !!!!

[Gregoshi]

Now THESE are some guys you don't want to mess with !!!!
Now that you mention it, the guy on stage looks like the toughest one in the room.~:eek:

[orangat]

The wire on the floor is probably some sort of mic receiver.

Badges, flags, smiles don't look edited. lol @ paranoid posts.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Um, orangat, the pic is clearly edited- wires do not hang off nothing into thin air.

Crazed Rabbit

[orangat]

Um, orangat, the pic is clearly edited- wires do not hang off nothing into thin air.

Crazed Rabbit

I think the wire is probably an antenna or a wireless mic.

If the pic is so egregiously edited, why hasn't this become a major piece of news?

Edit - A bit of searching turned this up.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1997264#1997679
From Jim Wilson, photographer for The New York Times:

I did no modify this picture in any way.

If you look carefully at the frame, you will see a slightly wide band of dark area that runs from the head of a marine with dark hair in the back row up to the singer. Look carefully at the wall from that marine's head up to the top of the frame and you will see the blurred cable that was in motion because the dancer was moving it as she spoke to the marines. The full cable is in the shot but is blurred. The reason it isn't sharp is because the frame was shot at 1/6 of a second in a room that was dark. The flash filled in the frame but wasn't the main light, the room light provided the main light for the frame. The long exposure balanced the light from the strobe on my camera with the ambient light in the room. The cable was moving as was the singer and the marines. If you look carefully at the frame, you'll see that nothing in the frame is tack/crisp sharp. I looked in the paper that I got out here and know that the reproduction left the wire virtually invisible.

The reason the cable on the platform is readable is because that length of cable wasn't moving. The dancer's body wasn't moving alot but her upper body was moving enough to blur the cable in the shot. Had the dancer not been moving ( or had I shot with a higher shutter speed which would have presented a whole other set of issues) the cable would have been sharp at that point. I chose to shoot this way because I didn't want the picture to have the look that a direct flash frame shot at high speed would have had (the dancer would have been lit and the rest of the frame would have been completely dark).

I wanted to picture to look like the performance actually appeared instead of like a moment frozen with just a enough light on the performer to illuminate her and not the rest of the frame. I wish I could have set the room with lots of lights to evenly illuminate it but I had only the strobe gear (one 580) that I carried in my bag. It wasn't nearly enough to properly light the room. There were no spot lights of any sort on the stage, just a few florescent lights in the ceiling of a room that was probably 30-40 feet tall and approximately the size of a gym.

I can understand how a reader might look at this and conclude what these readers concluded but absolutely no modification, manipulation or photoshop tricks took place on this or any other images I shot.


And speaking of photos, what happened to that someone who posted pictures from Lebanon and deleted the thread?

[Crazed Rabbit]

If the pic is so egregiously edited, why hasn't this become a major piece of news?

Why isn't the valerie plame was outed by armitage a major story? Or the fact that Israel really didn't hit beachgoers or an ambulance?

Because they are not objective.

And that's a poor lie for why it appears edited from the DU- the marine who has have his face covered by the perfectly vibrating cord-no changes in darkness along the wall-the half covered is lighter than the other half.

Also, the part where they stopped edited shows no signs of movement.

The whole area where the wire should be shows no effect of motion blur.

Crazed Rabbit

[Papewaio]

On my monitor I can see the zone where a cable would be all the way from the top to the bottom, and it could be moving and blurred.

Check the guys arm to the right of the girls calf and how blurred it is (long exposure) and the short guy to the left leaning towards the right...the side of his neck and face is blurred too... looks like he was trying to get a better view. Also the guy clapping or rubbing his hands in the front. All these are examples of movement over a long exposure.

[caravel]

Pape is exactly right, it's undoubtedly a long exposed shot and not a photoshop edit, even though the blurred mic lead does look like it.

[Husar]

Um, orangat, the pic is clearly edited- wires do not hang off nothing into thin air.

Crazed Rabbit
Like Pape already explained, the cable is visible. Pretty clearly in my oppinion.
It's rather easy, the bottom part of the cable won't move because it's lying on the ground, but further above, the cable will move a lot more so on a photo it can be blurred, but it is still clearly visible, just open your eyes and look closely.~;)
It may also be an issue with your monitor and contrast settings or other technical stuff, my last monitor would make dark grey turn black and so on.

[yesdachi]

I have been using Photoshop almost daily since 2.0 back in 91” and I would have to say that the image has been edited to remove the cord. It was probably used before it was complete due to a deadline. I could be wrong but that’s my :2cents:

[Xiahou]

Pape is exactly right, it's undoubtedly a long exposed shot and not a photoshop edit, even though the blurred mic lead does look like it.
I dont think so. If anyone has a digital camera, set it to a 1/6 second exposure and take a free-standing picture of a crowd and see what it looks like. And how did the cord get so transparently blurred in a setting like that? How fast did the cable have to be vibrating back and forth within that small darkened band for it to totally disappear and not just appear blurred?

Maybe part of the cable did appear blurry, so they edited it out in an attempt to save the picture- but I have a real hard time believing it isnt edited.

edit: You know, this would probably be easy enough for someone to test if they were bored enough. Take a black cord, dangle it in front of a camera set at 1/6 and see if you can make it disappear by wiggling it.... I seriously doubt someone could produce the same result.

[Ser Clegane]

Looks (sloppily) photoshopped to me.

If it was "blurred away" by movement the 20cm of cable that can still be see above the ground should at least be somewhat blurred as well, however it is not blurred at all.

Only the part of the cable that might have been considered to be "interfering" with the rest of the picture (i.e. the part that ran across light uniforma, faces, and the white wall) has been removed.

Seems like someone with a slight addiction to aestetics did a rush-job here...

[Gregoshi]

The more I look at the picture, the more I think the photographer is right - it isn't doctored. Any significant motion during a 1/6th second picture is going to be blurred. Just looking at some of the soldiers confirms that. As Husar mentioned, the friction of the mic cord lying on the stage will hold it in place, at least for the duration of the photo. If you look closely at the cord in the dark area from where it leaves the stage to the soldier's elbow, the cord goes from very distinct to practically invisible when it gets to the elbow. Also, at the top of the picture where the cord is closest to where it attaches to the mic, the blurred area is narrower, which would be consistent with any kind of swinging cord. Think of a jump rope - the two ends being held hardly move while the middle of the rope is moving quite a bit more.

:smash: Case closed. Next! :laugh4: