You know, until all this (the “scandal”) happened, I didn’t really know much about photo manipulation. I mean, I knew that it was used in magazines to make models appear thinner, have perfect skin etc. And of course, it has been used by the movie industry for years. If you read the previous article you get a small idea of some of the amazing special effects that were used on Snow White and Huntsman. It is often called CGI or Computer Generated Imagery.
Computer-generated imagery (CGI) is the application of computer graphics to create or contribute to images in art, printed media, video games, films, television programs, commercials, simulators and simulation generally. The visual scenes may be dynamic or static, and may be 2D or 3D, though the term “CGI” is most commonly used to refer to 3D computer graphics used for creating scenes or special effects in films and television.
Those special effects have become a standard in the industry. Think about some of the most popular movies around today. The Avengers, Batman (in all its many forms), Ironman, Transformers…the list goes on and on. You would be hard put to try to find a movie that DOESN’T have some sort of CGI effect in it.
But, it had never really occurred to me that it could be used in other ways. As I have followed the “scandal”, I have learned that photo manipulation is not only possible in the film industry, but is easily done by anyone with a computer and the right software. Did you know that if you Google “change heads photoshop” you will get 10 choices before you even go a page to choose an article. I was shocked! Did you also know there is even an APP for it? It’s called “iSwapFaces”! ANYBODY can do it with the right tools.
They have tutorials on how to do it. Check this out!
<—-This can be made into this—->
in NINE easy steps!!!!
Check it out for yourself: http://tutorials-photoshop.com/photo-editing/change-heads1/
You can even find a video to show you how to do it! Type change heads photoshop into Yahoo! and you will get multiple videos of what can be done and how to do it!
We even have examples on the blog—done by individuals—mostly for fun. For instance, have you checked out the Ruperv Bashing section of this blog? Take a look at the 50 Ways to Kill a Ruperv page. Do you think any of those events ever actually occurred? Of course not! They never occurred, not only that, some of them aren’t even possible. Ruperv being eaten by a troll? Heck the troll was not even real to start with! That was all done with photo manipulation. A manipulation of a manipulation. Whoa! Now that’s a concept!
About.com’s article entitled The Ethics of Digital Photo Manipulation in part states:
Doctoring photographs has been around almost as long as photography itself, but as digital imaging hardware and software has both advanced and come down in price, the practice of digital image manipulation has become much more commonplace and faked photos are becoming harder to detect. In fact, digital photo manipulation — commonly referred to as ‘photoshopping’ — has recently become a popular pastime, and many consider this photographic fakery to be a new art form. But when it works its way into photojournalism and the media, the issue of ethics comes to the forefront. How far can we take digital image manipulation and still maintain photographic integrity
There is a Code of Ethics for Digital Manipulation:
Digital Manipulation Code of Ethics
NPPA Statement of Principle
- Approved by the NPPA executive committee Nov. 12, 1990, in Tempe, Arizona.
- Revised by the NPPA Board of Directors July 3, 1991, in Washington, D.C.
- Incorporated into the NPPA Bylaws at the 50th Anniversary NPPA Convention in Washington, D.C., in June 1995, as part of Article XVII, Section C, the NPPA Code of Ethics.
adopted 1991 by the NPPA Board of Directors
As journalists we believe the guiding principle of our profession is accuracy; therefore, we believe it is wrong to alter the content of a photograph in any way that deceives the public.
As photojournalists, we have the responsibility to document society and to preserve its images as a matter of historical record. It is clear that the emerging electronic technologies provide new challenges to the integrity of photographic images … in light of this, we the National Press Photographers Association, reaffirm the basis of our ethics: Accurate representation is the benchmark of our profession. We believe photojournalistic guidelines for fair and accurate reporting should be the criteria for judging what may be done electronically to a photograph. Altering the editorial content … is a breach of the ethical standards recognized by the NPPA.
Digital manipulation of photographs is happening ALL the time. I also realize to refer to the people of FlameFlyNet Pictures as true journalists that could be held to a Code of Ethics, is unrealistic. But, if you think that the photographs of Kristen Stewart at the lookout point with Rupert couldn’t have been altered….you are living in a dream world.