 |
|
|
|
Next: How about Helen, then?
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Aug 08, 2006
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:04 am
Post subject: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored?
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital, others (more info?)
|
|
|
How did Reuters know (or suspect enough to prove) the Beriut IDF attach
photographs were doctored by Adnan Hajj using Photoshop?
For the record, the freelance photographer denies adding:
- flares dropped from an F16 which were purported to be missiles
- smoke from biuldings to show greater damage in Lebanon
Likewise, how did Reuters know that some of the other thousand photographs
Reuters bought from this Lebanese photographer since 1993 were NOT
doctored?
I'm not a professional photographer or editor ... but I take photos and
edit them so that's the first thought that pops into my head when I heard
about this.
Was he just sloppy? Or is there a fool-proof method?
What constitutes "doctoring"?
Why didn't Reuters detect it in the vetting process?
Are doctored photographs common in the news-reporting industry?
Is there a standard method to prove photos are doctored or not?
How did they know that "PhotoShop" was used to doctor the photos?
What's the percentage of news photos that are doctored?
Do editors actually look at photos for signs of doctoring?
This trust issue raises so many questions for me ...
barb |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Aug 08, 2006
Posts: 69
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:04 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital (more info?)
|
|
|
Julie Green wrote:
> I agree, but if you can somehow bypass the hysteria, shill
> websites etc, you'll see it was nothing more than a stupid
> but honest mistake.
Stupid, yes. Honest, no. What makes you think it was an honest mistake?
> CNN showed side-by-sides of the
> original and "doctored" images, and it really does amount
> to nothing.
True, in the excessive smoke image, the doctored image (you don't need
quotes on the word doctored) does not make that much of a difference.
But there was another image in which he duplicated one flare from an
F-16 to be three, and tried to pass them off as missiles. That's a
blatant attempt to bias the truth. And this also throws all of his
images into question. It's called integrity.
For someone who is accusing the U.S. media of being a propaganda
machine, you'd think that you would appreciate some truth and integrity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 11, 2004
Posts: 1680
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:04 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 08, 2006
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:42 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"barb" <bwarr1.RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote in message news:1npqhtj9df7v3$.nihsrzr1d22u.dlg@40tude.net...
> How did Reuters know (or suspect enough to prove) the Beriut IDF attach
> photographs were doctored by Adnan Hajj using Photoshop?
>
> For the record, the freelance photographer denies adding:
> - flares dropped from an F16 which were purported to be missiles
> - smoke from biuldings to show greater damage in Lebanon
It was a grand total of TWO photos, out of FOUR HUNDRED
taken by the photographer. And all he did was run Photoshop's
Dust & Scratches filter on the two photos, which as every pro
photographer knows can have unexpected consequences on an
image (such as making smoke appear darker).
Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. The Jewish
controlled U.S. mass media propaganda machine has completely
hoodwinked the American people, and their government. >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 11, 2004
Posts: 1680
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:42 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Julie Green wrote:
> "barb" <bwarr1 DeleteThis @cox.net> wrote in message
> news:1npqhtj9df7v3$.nihsrzr1d22u.dlg@40tude.net...
>> How did Reuters know (or suspect enough to prove) the Beriut IDF
>> attach photographs were doctored by Adnan Hajj using Photoshop?
>>
>> For the record, the freelance photographer denies adding:
>> - flares dropped from an F16 which were purported to be missiles
>> - smoke from biuldings to show greater damage in Lebanon
>
> It was a grand total of TWO photos, out of FOUR HUNDRED
> taken by the photographer. And all he did was run Photoshop's
> Dust & Scratches filter on the two photos, which as every pro
> photographer knows can have unexpected consequences on an
> image (such as making smoke appear darker).
Bull.
He cloned extensively, including full buildings.
He darkened the smoke and extended it upward.
And...he exposed himself as perhaps the WORST Photoshop user on Earth (save,
perhaps, for a guy I know from Australia 
>
> Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. The Jewish
> controlled U.S. mass media propaganda machine has completely
> hoodwinked the American people, and their government.
Uh... Julie?
YOU--have been hoodwinked.
--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 01, 2004
Posts: 1249
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:42 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <4vVBg.1382$Qf.714@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Julie
Green <juliegblk.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote:
> It was a grand total of TWO photos, out of FOUR HUNDRED
> taken by the photographer. And all he did was run Photoshop's
> Dust & Scratches filter on the two photos, which as every pro
> photographer knows can have unexpected consequences on an
> image (such as making smoke appear darker).
>
> Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. The Jewish
> controlled U.S. mass media propaganda machine has completely
> hoodwinked the American people, and their government.
It did far more than make the smoke darker. The smoke looked phony with
repeating patterns. >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 01, 2004
Posts: 1249
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:42 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <GDWBg.1047$Sn3.880@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Julie
Green <juliegblk.DeleteThis@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I agree, but if you can somehow bypass the hysteria, shill
> websites etc, you'll see it was nothing more than a stupid
> but honest mistake. CNN showed side-by-sides of the
> original and "doctored" images, and it really does amount
> to nothing.
Mistake? It was an obvious attempt at 'enhancement'. >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 06, 2006
Posts: 9
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 7:25 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
>
> Was he just sloppy? Or is there a fool-proof method?
There is no fool-proof method. The photographaer wasn't just sloppy. He was
the fool.
> What constitutes "doctoring"?
'Doctoring' is any and all manipulation of a photograph.
> Why didn't Reuters detect it in the vetting process?
I don't know. Probably time pressure, deadline, fading light... Who knows?
> Are doctored photographs common in the news-reporting industry?
Doctored photographs are considered totally unacceptable by all major news
agencies.
> Is there a standard method to prove photos are doctored or not?
> How did they know that "PhotoShop" was used to doctor the photos?
They didn't, the just guessed.
> What's the percentage of news photos that are doctored?
You never know. It's like doping in sports. It's illegal, unethical and
unaccepted. But it still happens.
>
> Do editors actually look at photos for signs of doctoring?
Not actively, would be my guess.
> This trust issue raises so many questions for me ...
> barb
JL >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 08, 2006
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:17 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Julie Green wrote:
> "barb" <bwarr1.TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote in message news:1npqhtj9df7v3$.nihsrzr1d22u.dlg@40tude.net...
> > How did Reuters know (or suspect enough to prove) the Beriut IDF attach
> > photographs were doctored by Adnan Hajj using Photoshop?
> >
> > For the record, the freelance photographer denies adding:
> > - flares dropped from an F16 which were purported to be missiles
> > - smoke from biuldings to show greater damage in Lebanon
>
> It was a grand total of TWO photos, out of FOUR HUNDRED
> taken by the photographer. And all he did was run Photoshop's
> Dust & Scratches filter on the two photos, which as every pro
> photographer knows can have unexpected consequences on an
> image (such as making smoke appear darker).
>
> Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. The Jewish
> controlled U.S. mass media propaganda machine has completely
> hoodwinked the American people, and their government.
It's nice to see that anti-Semites can again raise their ugly heads
without fear or shame. It amazes me how many suffer from the desease,
and just another proof of why we needed Israel in the first place.
As for the matter itself, Arab media are notorious in their flexible
truth and exaggeration tendency. Unfortunately, lately other media have
been shown to follow suite. A healthy dash of skepticism and critical
thinking is advised with ANY photo, article, or personal account,
regardless of the religious belief of its media outlet's shareholders.
The above mentioned photos are 2 that have been caught, not 2 out of
400. there are many many other doctored, staged, or totally fabricated
stories and photos in the history of the conflict, and it's our duty,
as news consumer, to stay alert and critical.
OK, got to go drink another muslim boy's blood, ciao. >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Mar 20, 2005
Posts: 2559
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:00 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 13:26:49 GMT, BJ in Texas wrote:
> || Honest mistake on the part of Reuters, perhaps...just not the
> || photog...
>
> Meaning that (use one or all of the following reasons):
> 1). Reuters is not discerning enough to spot obviously
> doctored photographs.
> 2). A professional news organization has no one with the
> skill to identify doctored photographs. They were
> originally identified by someone outside of Reuters.
> 3). Reuters got careless.
> 4). Reuters thought readers would be too stupid to spot
> obviously doctored photographs and the doctored
> photographs had higher news impact.
> 5). Reuters has a political agenda that was advanced by
> using the doctored photographs.
Reuters may slip up from time to time, but the odds that options
4) or 5) are behind this blunder are extremely unlikely. It's much
more probable that the reasons for including them are the same ones
given by the options themselves, if ya know what I mean, Vern. >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 11, 2005
Posts: 145
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:48 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 30, 2006
Posts: 411
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:53 am
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"barb" <bwarr1.RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1npqhtj9df7v3$.nihsrzr1d22u.dlg@40tude.net...
> How did Reuters know (or suspect enough to prove) the Beriut IDF attach
> photographs were doctored by Adnan Hajj using Photoshop?
>
> For the record, the freelance photographer denies adding:
> - flares dropped from an F16 which were purported to be missiles
> - smoke from biuldings to show greater damage in Lebanon
>
> Likewise, how did Reuters know that some of the other thousand photographs
> Reuters bought from this Lebanese photographer since 1993 were NOT
> doctored?
>
> I'm not a professional photographer or editor ... but I take photos and
> edit them so that's the first thought that pops into my head when I heard
> about this.
>
> Was he just sloppy? Or is there a fool-proof method?
> What constitutes "doctoring"?
> Why didn't Reuters detect it in the vetting process?
> Are doctored photographs common in the news-reporting industry?
> Is there a standard method to prove photos are doctored or not?
> How did they know that "PhotoShop" was used to doctor the photos?
> What's the percentage of news photos that are doctored?
>
> Do editors actually look at photos for signs of doctoring?
> This trust issue raises so many questions for me ...
> barb
Hi.
The whole point is not how many, or which, photos he doctored, but that he
did modify photos and pass them off as genuine..
Because he was caught out, by someone who is politically motivated, does not
reduce his guilt in any way.
Once his credibility is removed, Reuters can not risk their reputation by
continuing to use his stuff, any of his stuff, so all of his images had to
be deleted from their Data-base.
Arguments about his political leanings, or those of his detractors, are
irrelevant. The pictures are either genuine or not.
Removing imperfections is acceptable, but adding buildings or smoke or
flares or any other material elements is not acceptable, and the line
between these two activities is very wide and clear.
Roy G >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 01, 2006
Posts: 487
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 1:30 pm
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
barb wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 23:41:45 -0700, Roger N. Clark (change username to
> rnclark) wrote:
>> There is now software that analyzes for replicated pixels
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> Thanks for that information about the software that analyzes for replicated
> pixels. It makes me feel safer that I know there is a foolproof scientific
> method to locate these faked photographs.
>
> The good news is that the culprits will be caught.
Yes, eventually. But will the media print or broadcast a retraction?
Look what happened with the whole Gaza beach incident, which turned out
to be a Hamas land mine that exploded, not an Israeli missile.
Will Reuters stop falling for propaganda like this? Unlikely. >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 08, 2006
Posts: 17
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:16 pm
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Julie Green" <juliegblk RemoveThis @earthlink.net> wrote
> It was a grand total of TWO photos, out of FOUR HUNDRED
> taken by the photographer. And all he did was run Photoshop's
> Dust & Scratches filter on the two photos, which as every pro
> photographer knows can have unexpected consequences on an
> image (such as making smoke appear darker).
So this guy still uses FILM in a combat zone, uses Photoshop to remove dust
from the scan, and then transmits it digitally to Reuters? Seems a bit
unlikely, but I'd be interested to find out if this was the case.
Paul >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 08, 2006
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:13 pm
Post subject: Re: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
BJ in Texas wrote:
> MarkČ <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
> || Bucky wrote:
> ||| Julie Green wrote:
> |||| I agree, but if you can somehow bypass the hysteria, shill
> |||| websites etc, you'll see it was nothing more than a stupid
> |||| but honest mistake.
> |||
> ||| Stupid, yes. Honest, no. What makes you think it was an
> ||| honest mistake?
> ||
> || Honest mistake on the part of Reuters, perhaps...just not the
> || photog...
>
> Meaning that (use one or all of the following reasons):
> 1). Reuters is not discerning enough to spot obviously
> doctored photographs.
> 2). A professional news organization has no one with the
> skill to identify doctored photographs. They were
> originally identified by someone outside of Reuters.
> 3). Reuters got careless.
> 4). Reuters thought readers would be too stupid to spot
> obviously doctored photographs and the doctored
> photographs had higher news impact.
> 5). Reuters has a political agenda that was advanced by
> using the doctored photographs.
>
> --
> BJ
I suspect that the reason Reuters got "careless" is that it is a NEWS
organization, not a forensic organization. They have to get photos out
in a timely fashion and their focus is on timeliness. I suspect this
experience will make them more alert to another aspect of their job,
though.
BB >> Stay informed about: How did Reuters know Beirut IDF attack photos were doctored? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
