You are invited to participate in a survey that focuses on alterations photojournalists make to the images published in the media. The survey is part of a research project that tries to find out photographers’ approaches towards photo alterations, as well as audience attitudes towards these changes. Your identity will be kept confidential.
Please click here to take audience survey. Enjoy it!
Please click here to take photojournalists survey. Enjoy it!
If you have questions about my research please contact me at:
Gordana Icevska
gordana@ryerson.ca
1-416-545-0096. If you have questions regarding your rights as a human subject and participant in this study, you may contact the Ryerson University Research Ethics Board for information at:
Research Ethics Board
Before you start answering the questions you will have to read and understand the consent form. Please contact me if you need more information about the consent, research or questions.
The results will be used for my MA thesis “Shooting the truth”. I am a graduate student in Communication and Culture, a joint programme of two Canadian universities (http://ryerson.ca/graduate/programs/comcult/),
If you are interested, it will be my pleasure to provide you with the results of the survey and findings of my research.
I appreciate your help.
Thank you very much.
More details about the project
My research will focus on the manipulation photojournalists make to the images that are supposed to deliver news and present the reality/truth. In the 19th century liberal retouching was used in order to have photography accepted as art (to look like a painting). From the late 20th century until today, technology allows wide range of changes to images and these changes have been used extensively, for both artistic and news photography.
My research will try to answers the following questions:
1) How does photojournalism manipulate the truth?
2) How often do photojournalists change images/content on their news photographs? Do they consider this ethical/unethical?
3) Is it ethical to make any changes to news photography?
4) How these changes affect audience trust in the truth portrayed by the images they view?
This will be achieved through:
- Comparative analysis of the work of three photographers/photojournalists with different approaches: Andre Kertesz, Henry Cartier-Bresson, Sebastiao Salgado and Eugene Smith.
- Examining the recent examples of photo manipulation in media including staging, using effects and digital alterations.
- Investigating if the media have policy/codes of ethic for editing, altering and creating photographs and visual elements in their news coverage.
- Survey and interviews with photographers and photo editors about their approach towards alterations and editing.
- Survey of the audience perceptions of changing journalistic photographs.
If you need more information about the project or if you have questions, please contact me.
4 comments:
The original premise is flawed because “truth” in photography is impossible to define. For example, consider a photographer focusing only on a gorgeous flower in bloom, one nanometer out of frame from a mass grave containing countless rotting corpses. Is the resulting, absolutely stunning, totally unmanipulated flower photo telling the stupid “truth”?
Wish to discuss it elsewhere, where you tossed the seed and the conversation sprouted? Sure:
http://www.lightstalkers.org/shooting-the-truth
I have answered your survey but while some of your questions referred to news others were more celebrity related. As a photojournalist I would never photoshop an image to make a better composition. I believe the photographer who cut and pasted the example you showed from Iraq was fired. If I were photographing a theater production where all the lighting, set and composition is constructed I would have less of a problem manipulating the image as well to produce a more artistic representation. Not all photography uses the same set of rules but it does annoy me when celeb mags perpetuate stereo types and PR through their manipulation of photo's, this undermines the work of honest photographers who often put their lives on the line to bring us powerful photo's from very difficult situations where they are trying to bring us their version of a truth. A photographer ultimately always chooses which direction to point a camera and when to press the shutter, so to this extent photography can always be accused of subjectivity over objectivity.
It's an interesting survey that provoke the awareness of journalistic photography,
I did your survey and find it well designed, friendly, and clear. I was introduced to do this survey by one of my professors at Sheridan College. I like the survey is because we had similar discussion in class on the authenticity and editing of the photography.
Basically, I think the photography in journalism differs from its other applications. For example in art or other 'pure' photography.
From my point of view, the photography applied in the journalism is to aid to human eye, so by its nature, it should be considered as a second sight aided with photographic equipment, producing the images as our eyes see.
But, I still choose to allow some technical changes made with proper editing which allows the news-media to publish photos meeting aesthetic standard to avoid any unpleasant photos to be published
But any changes should be noticed in caption to the audience, or to be numbered for filing purposes.
John lakeshore (nick name)
Journalist Sheridan College,
Canadian Journalism for International Trained Writers (2008)
July 13, 2008
,
Hi Gordana, it is an interesting survey, but I thought it was missing some openness - there were several instances where my answer didn't really match the options.
Sorry - hope you don't mind some constructive criticism!!!
I recognize that it's hard to get subjective answers with a multiple choice survey, but I think your data would be more accurate if you changed some of the questions.
I think some questions you could have included are, "What is the intent of the photographer? What impression is the photographer trying to give you? How is that different from the impression you get from the orginal picture? Is this misleading or just trying to make things clearer?"
To me, the intent is what makes it ethical or not ethical. Some of the images I thought were funny - the motivations behind the changes were the important part for me. I think the questions could ask about the motivations and intent of the photographers and if that intent is ethical, rather than the changes. The intent is all important.
For example, with the guy in the canoe, they took off a roll of fat, to save his image. That's ok, I think it's funny that people are so vain that they can't show themselves as they are, but the emphasis was not on showing that he's skinny, it was about him canoeing or something. However, with the picture of Martha Stewart, they were making claims that she was "skinnier" now, and misrepresenting her body as someone else's. That is a visual lie, in my mind.
The image of the soldier and the father with his hurt son - it's weird. I tried to figure out what was going on there. I am not sure what they were trying to accomplish by changing that image. What was the intent? I guess it shows the soldier being more aggressive and powerful - maybe it's some army propaganda thing. But I would have thought if there was an agenda it would be to show the people getting along with the army and being glad the soldiers are there. So I don't get why they changed it. They even changed the face of the little boy at right, so that he's more cartoony. That's just odd. Why would they care to do that? The original photos tell a clearer story than the altered one, as real things usually do.
Thanks for the thought provoking survey. And best of luck with it Gordana!
Take care, Rachel.
Post a Comment