Digital photography is the most popular medium used today. It’s used for print advertising, social media, identification, etc. Everywhere you look there is a photograph. Also, with the introduction of cameras into cellular devices, now everyone has the ability to take high quality photographs and share them with the world. Of course all of this would hold no grounds if it weren’t for the success of social media websites like Facebook. According to Mashable, “posts that include a photo album or a picture generate about 180% and 120% more engagement than the average post respectively. More than 250 million photos are uploaded to Facebook each day (Handy 2012).”
Another popular social media platform is Instagram, a smart phone application that allows users to manipulate their photos with unique filters and upload them for their friends/the world to see. It’s a social media application that’s a fast and fun way to share photographs. The tremendous success of this application eventually led to a “$1 billion cash-and-stock deal (Rusli 2012).” This is an unprecedented buyout for a young company but clearly Zuckerberg saw potential. Now Instagram and Facebook go hand-in-hand with one another.
It’s clear that digital photography has brought forth tremendous success for many companies and individuals. However, with every positive there is a negative. Content issues are more prevalent than ever. In fact with programs like Adobe Photoshop, photo manipulation can be used by anyone. This is a huge problem. Now that more and more people use the Internet for information, it’s hard to tell what’s authentic and what is not.
Photoshop has gone through six revisions since it’s induction in the early 90’s. Since then countless companies, organizations, and individuals have used it. With each release the program gets more powerful and more user friendly. This makes image manipulation more difficult to target – especially to those without experience. Image manipulation is extremely dangerous because anyone and everyone can do it. An example of this is in the fashion industry.
Fashion moguls use print photography in advertisements, magazines, and products. They often depict beautiful and flawless men and women. What most people don’t understand is that these photographs have been retouched, most likely in Photoshop. They do this in order to get rid of undesirable blemishes or traits. The fashion industry uses this to target consumers order to buy their products. In 2006, Dove released a video about the process that a billboard model goes through from preparation to print. It’s interesting how truthful this ad is. It’s a sped up video that starts with the model getting makeup and hair. Then she gets her photos taken. Afterwards, the pictures are brought into Photoshop where everything is edited. Her neck is elongated, her eyes are widened, and her hair is trimmed. Finally, the edited photograph looks nothing like the model. At the end of the video, text reads “no wonder our perception of beauty is distorted.” It’s important to note that this process is a daily occurrence especially for celebrities and successful businesses. They are manipulating the public in order to sell an idea, product, or lifestyle.
Governments and news media also use photograph manipulation in order to target individuals or portray certain messages. This type of propaganda has been around for quite some time. In an ideal world, an entity like the government or news media would print factual information. That isn’t necessarily true especially because there is a specific process in which the images and texts are arranged. For example, the most recent tragedy occurred during the Boston marathon. According to an article, the Daily News posted a Photoshopped image of the massacre on their front page. The image is a bloody scene where two women are injured. Beside one woman is a man attempting to help her. Apparently, that image was altered in a way that made the photograph less gory. “Media commentators are outraged that a photo of the Boston bombings used on the front page of the New York Daily News was edited to make it more palatable. The doctored image shows a horrific scene of a man helping an injured woman on a blood-spattered pavement. In the original shot she has a significant leg wound, but in the Daily News image her wound has been edited out so it appears to be covered by her black pants (stuff.co.nz 2013).” Many people were upset saying, “Images should be edited in such a way to maintain the integrity of the photographic images’ content and context.” Apparently it was the editor’s decision to alter the original out of respect and sensitivity to the survivors and their families.
I suppose it’s understandable that the fashion and advertisement companies would use photo manipulation. They are a business after all. Their main conquests are selling products and making profits. However, you’d expect more from the governments and news media outlets. They are supposed to look out for the best interests of the people. It seems that they too are operating like businesses nowadays. It’s sickening to think that we put so much trust into those who govern us that they would abuse their powers in order to further their own conquests. Image manipulation is an easy and effective way to do so. If we were to take a look at North Korea for example, they too use image manipulation in order to scare Americans into thinking they are a powerful force to be reckoned with. According to NPR, North Korea issued a doctored image showing the landing and anti-landing drills of their military force (O’Neill 2013). Apparently, this isn’t the first altered image that North Korea has produced.
Though photo tampering is more apparent in today’s digital age, in fact it’s been occurring since the invention of photography. Fourandsix.com lists a ton of manipulated photographs of many notable historical figures and events dating back since 1860. Joseph Stalin, the leader of the Soviet Union, is known to use photo manipulation to get rid of individuals. “Stalin routinely air-brushed his enemies out photographs. In this photograph a commissar was removed from the original photograph after falling out of favor with Stalin (fourandsix.com).” According to the Washington Post, “Manipulated images can be used to make a political comment, to garner support or to foster fear. The communist revolutionaries of the early half of the 20th century were masters of manipulated photography. Elaborate montages were constructed that extolled, and no doubt invigorated, the masses. But a more ominous use of alteration was the systematic erasing of Stalin’s supporters…Photo-manipulation with an intend to deceive is the scourge of the medium (Griffin 2013).”
Ethically, photograph manipulation is a touchy subject. However, I feel that it is completely justified if a photographer chooses to edit their images for artistic purposes. In that case, photo manipulation is a part of the creative process. “Photography is not required to be real; it simply needs to be honest, even when done in jest (Griffin 2013).” It’s important to understand that a photographer controls how the final image will appear. Ethics depend on what that photograph will be used for and how they plan on using it. For many hobbyists, capturing an image is for the sole purpose of artistic engagement. Perhaps they plan on selling the print for money. Perhaps they plan on keeping it themselves. Perhaps they are doing it for fun. Photography lies in the hands of the photographer. “Photographers interpret what they see in a myriad of ways. The choice of lens by focal length and working f/stop alter spatial relationship between objects in the frame. The choice of the location and focal length changes the very content of the picture. The choice of when to trip the shutter freezes a particular moment in a fluid and continuously changing time stream. The real world is not recorded with strict objectivity in photographs because they are taken by human photographers who exercise editorial judgments in the taking of the photo, which includes the personal preferences, aesthetics, prejudices, intentions and philosophies of the photographer who takes the image (Lodriguss 2006).” As long as the photographer is honest with their intentions, then we as an audience can learn to accept their choices.
Works Cited
“Gory Boston bombing photo a little too gory.” stuff.co.nz World. N.p., 19 Apr. 2013. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/8572611/Gory-Boston-bombing-photo-a-little-too-gory>.
Griffin, David. “Seeing is unbelieving – Washington Post.” Featured Articles From The Washington Post. N.p., 22 Feb. 2013. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-22/entertainment/37234680_1_images-manipulation-photographers>.
Handy, Matt. “Facebook Photos: The Key to a Successful Social Media Campaign.” Mashable. N.p., 19 Mar. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <http://mashable.com/2012/03/19/facebook-marketing-photos-brands/>.
Hayman, David. “DOVE “Evolution”.” Vimeo. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Apr. 2013. <https://vimeo.com/4097606>.
“Image Authentication and Forensics | Fourandsix Technologies – Photo Tampering throughout History.” Image Authentication and Forensics | Fourandsix Technologies – Home. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <http://www.fourandsix.com/photo-tampering-history/>.
Lodriguss, Jerry. “The Ethics of Digital Manipulation.” Catching the Light: Astrophotography by Jerry Lodriguss. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <http://www.astropix.com/HTML/J_DIGIT/ETHICS.HTM>.
O’Neill, Claire . “North Korea Caught Photoshopping … Again (Do We Care?) : The Picture Show : NPR.” NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. N.p., 29 Mar. 2013. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/pictureshow/2013/03/29/175588972/north-korea-caught-photoshopping-again-do-we-care>.
Rusli, Evelyn M.. “Facebook Buys Instagram for $1 Billion – NYTimes.com.” Mergers, Acquisitions, Venture Capital, Hedge Funds – DealBook – NYTimes.com. N.p., 9 Apr. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2013. <http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/04/09/facebook-buys-instagram-for-1-billion/>.
Digital Photography 