[photo-3d] Re: CGI

["Tom Deering" <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> 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.

I will repeat, for those who post without reading, that images in magazines are routinely 
sweetened.  This means that stray hairs, backgrounds, skin texture, shadows and reflections are 
routinely manipulated with a computer for artistic reasons.

But this has been true for a _century_.  The list of ways that reality is routinely mainupated with 
traditional photography is long and familiar.  All without a computer:

-Leave the shutter open a bit too long, and dusk turns to afternoon

-Do the same with film developing, or print developing

-Or do the same by igniting some magnesium powder.

-Leave the shutter open longer, and moving people disappear altogether

Lies, all lies.

So this bias against computer-tainted photography is just a tad hypocritical.  How is it any 
different to change the texture of a model's skin with a computer than to do the same thing with 
cornstarch powder?

Tom Deering

PS-I find this list has less and less to do with stereo photography.  Has everything been said?