| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/05/2013 07:09:18 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Maybe Godzilla is a Republican? |
Or a guy? ;-) |
Well, in the version I saw, "he" laid about a hundred good-sized (7-ft) eggs ... |
Oh.. I thought it was the *movie* that laid an egg! ;-) |
|
|
|
01/05/2013 07:50:30 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Can you imagine saying No to Nancy Pelosi?
|
Yes. |
|
|
|
01/05/2013 07:53:15 PM · #28 |
| I think the real question is does anyone have the guts to say "no" to Grover Norquist ... |
|
|
|
01/05/2013 08:06:29 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Can you imagine saying No to Nancy Pelosi?
|
Yes. |
+1 |
|
|
|
01/05/2013 08:48:11 PM · #30 |
|
|
|
01/05/2013 09:37:24 PM · #31 |
It looks like they also did a non-trivial amount of face unstacking as well - in the edited version, you can see everyone's face. I don't know if the left image is cropped, but it appears to be missing several ladies on the right side of the original.
Trust becomes an important concept in these situations - a concept seemingly incomprehensible to members of Congress, regardless of political affiliation. |
|
|
|
01/06/2013 03:23:42 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by dtremain:
It looks like they also did a non-trivial amount of face unstacking as well - in the edited version, you can see everyone's face. I don't know if the left image is cropped, but it appears to be missing several ladies on the right side of the original.
Trust becomes an important concept in these situations - a concept seemingly incomprehensible to members of Congress, regardless of political affiliation. |
Understand that the two images posted at CNN are not before and after editing shots. They are an edited shot and another taken by a different photographer, around the same time, from a different angle and with different light.
I take the occasional group shot with between a few dozen to a few hundred people and some people who really want to be in the shot always miss the time. I take a few dozen shots and release the group, and a few minuets later someone runs up shocked that they missed the shot. I always mark where the last person in the last row was, and I take a few more frames with the late comers seated in that row, so I can edit them into the group picture.
So two things amaze me about this thread. Whoever took the late arrivals shot was an idiot not to place them where they should have been had they been on time. Anyone who feels that they should have held the group at the location until everyone arrived there, has never tried to keep a group of people in one place facing the same direction for more than a few minutes. Try doing that with any group, let alone a group of people who so relentlessly driven that they can get themselves elected to Congress.
The idea of demanding that over 50 congress people hang around on a January day in below freezing weather on the steps of a busy National monument for what amounts to a class picture, where the whole class shows up is really pretty silly. This is not an important historic document, and these are busy people, and acting as if adding the late comers (however badly) through photomanipulation is some sort of violation of the public trust is farcical. If this was a picture of a high school chess team, would you be as offended that they Photoshopped in the kids who showed up late?
PS The only full image without the crop on the right that showed the whole image was from a German magazine Die Welt and the article wasn't about the picture, but about how poorly the american public thinks of Congress, which this thread QEDs
Message edited by author 2013-01-06 04:44:43. |
|
|
|
01/06/2013 08:05:33 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
...
The idea of demanding that over 50 congress people hang around on a January day in below freezing weather on the steps of a busy National monument for what amounts to a class picture, where the whole class shows up is really pretty silly. This is not an important historic document, and these are busy people, and acting as if adding the late comers (however badly) through photomanipulation is some sort of violation of the public trust is farcical. If this was a picture of a high school chess team, would you be as offended that they Photoshopped in the kids who showed up late?... |
I disagree. The photoshopped image is not an accurate historical record of the moment. It was presented by a government official to the public as a historical photograph. There was a congresswoman who was out of town attending a funeral. Should we expect that her face will be pasted in at some point in the future? The altering of the photo was a fraudulent act. It matters because it was a government photo of a historical event. We should hold our government to the highest standards of truth.
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."
George Orwell
|
|
|
|
01/06/2013 08:16:47 AM · #34 |
I think it's important to see how responsible publications handled the photo and story. No photoshopped people added. Nothing cloned out.
NY Times |
|
|
|
01/06/2013 07:27:46 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
I think it's important to see how responsible publications handled the photo and story. No photoshopped people added. Nothing cloned out.
NY Times |
The NY Times is responsible?
HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH. Thanks for that. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 08:23:47 AM EDT.
