Re: [photo-3d] Re: CGI

[Herbert C Maxey <bmaxey1@xxxxxxxx>]

> National Geographic once offered it's readers a cover that was
> pieced together from digital images; and long before any of us had 
> the
> means or knowledge to create digital images of any merit.>>

Jim Replied:

> As I recall, it was not exactly "pieced together," but modified to 
> create a vertical format to fit the cover from a horizontal 
> photograph, about 15 years ago.  If memory serves, it involved the 
> repositioning of Egyptian pyramids, and it was done using an 
> incredibly expensive "sytex" machine.  

I think you are correct. 

>It caused a firestorm of  controversy among those of us (me included)
who believed it was a 
> giant jump down the slippery slope of faked photojournalism.  Can 
> you imagine anyone getting so upset about so innocent a modification 
> now? Is seeing still believing?  Does anyone even care???

I care and it is still a fear. Photos can do amazing things to people. 

I fear that one day - hell, NOW, we can't be sure that any image we see
has not been manipulated in some way. I am not talking about correcting
sharpness, exposure or color, but lies told using not words, but images.

In the old days incredible lengths were taken to create manipulated
images. The techniques included using the venerable airbrush, as well as
actually physically stripping individual emulsion layers and mechanically
reassembling them. 

I might get hammered for this comment, but I also have a problem with
photographs that have been extensively corrected. I think less and less
skill is needed to create photographs these days because the photographer
realizes he has Photoshop to correct anything that is wrong. 

Bob