top bar
QuickTopic free message boards logo
Skip to Messages

TOPIC:

Photoshop artifact in NYTimes news photo

^     All messages            6-21 of 21  1-5 >>
21
G3K
08-08-2003
11:40 PM ET (US)
Looks like you forgot your /i, mate.
20
mspPerson was signed in when posted
08-08-2003
12:39 PM ET (US)
re: yesno's comment

there are apps/key combos depending on your system and software to grab just the contents of a window/component, etc and not have any of the other boundaries, borders, and other GUI related crap, etc etc.

plus, a screen grab can be cropped afterwards. looks like rush job.
m.
19
meg
08-08-2003
08:06 AM ET (US)
It was photoshopped -- the shadows are all wrong. There is a person behind the big white guy whose arm should be shadowed for the man's shadow to appear on the car, for example. Several more shadows are incorrect.
18
yesnoPerson was signed in when posted
08-07-2003
10:28 PM ET (US)
Wouldn't any screen grab of an image that wasn't full screen with no background require quite a bit a chopping to make useful? I mean, wouldn't you have to either cut out a lot of black background or lots of window borders, etc?
17
mafPerson was signed in when posted
08-07-2003
05:59 PM ET (US)
Lintilla is right. This is just the result of someone clueless at Photoshop resizing the image by doing a screen grab at a certain zoom, then converting the grab to JPEG.

For a lot of reasons, they should have used "Save for Web..." instead.
16
jonnyx
08-07-2003
03:51 PM ET (US)
at least it looks like they are using a mac:)
15
RodMcGuirePerson was signed in when posted
08-07-2003
03:47 PM ET (US)
usually it is considered a "legiimate" alteration to blur a license plate which was my first impression of what the cursor was doing.

Even if this changes the *facts* in the picture.
14
cypherpunksPerson was signed in when posted
08-07-2003
03:36 PM ET (US)
There's *tons* of stuff that's legitimate for news photographers to do in photoshop. Cropping's one, yep -- but also fixing color balance that's off, bringing out contrast, sharpening -- roughly, everything a photographer used to do in a darkroom.

What you can't do is change the *facts* in the picture.
13
Scott
08-07-2003
03:03 PM ET (US)
I always crop my pictures in Photoshop. Cropping is a widely accepted form of image alteration. I don't think any news organization would have a problem with a cropped image. This is nothing new and is certainly not newsworthy.
Edited 08-07-2003 03:03 PM
12
erniePerson was signed in when posted
08-07-2003
01:30 PM ET (US)
So this 'war' we've been hearing about never even happened?
11
Joe
08-07-2003
01:10 PM ET (US)
Or you could learn to spell.
10
scotty1Person was signed in when posted
08-07-2003
01:06 PM ET (US)
In my opinion, the NYT isn't trying to report the news. The seem to be on a social agenda.
9
scorched
08-07-2003
12:48 PM ET (US)
from my coworker: "maybe some geek just targeted the car with a UAV"
8
LKM
08-07-2003
12:46 PM ET (US)
Yeah, this has got *nothing* to do with Photoshop. It's *not* a "Photoshop artifact". The picture probably wasn't substantially altered. It's just a screenshot. Now why they took a screenshot we'll never know, but it's definitely not some kind of hint that the picture was altered.
7
Lintilla
08-07-2003
12:42 PM ET (US)
Very easy to deduce what happened here.

Lots of people don't have a clue how to save a Photoshop image in a resolution suitable for the web. The solution if you don't want to spend five minutes once and for all learning the fundamentals of electronically reproduced images is to make a screenshot when you've got it displayed at the right size...
6
Stefan JonesPerson was signed in when posted
08-07-2003
12:32 PM ET (US)
You're ignoring another possibility: The car had an arrow-shaped sticker up front that just happened to be facing the photographer square-on.
^     All messages            6-21 of 21  1-5 >>

Print | RSS Views: 3716 (Unique: 1982 ) / Subscribers: 3 | What's this?