Photo Manipulators

We see things differently

Photo Tampering Throughout History

scottimages scottimages 1871 posts

Apparently we’ve been doing it for ages. It’s interesting though, that it seems to take on such a “dishonest” taint when used in news & current affairs situations.

Clickety click

Guyzimij Guyzimij 79 posts

Airbrushed polititions? It just Don’t work.On them.

DragonFlyer DragonFlyer 2263 posts

Yep – it’s been happening since the start of photography pretty much… That is a superb compilation of images and history!

Though Rosemary – in news and current affairs there’s another name for it and that’s “propaganda and/or mass marketing tool”, which no longer has anything to do with a technique used to create ‘art’. That’s why I have a little trouble with the term “photo manipulation” – the “manipulation” bit, at least, as the word “manipulation” can be sometimes looked on as pretty similar to what those putting together the propaganda for their own motives were doing to people…

It’s that BIG difference between – are you doing the “manipulating” to the images you are using purely for the sake of the image, or are your aims actually to “manipulate” the viewers of the image… and sometimes that can be a tricky line to find…

scottimages scottimages 1871 posts

It’s a great collection isn’t it? Yes, the term ‘manipulation’ unfortunately can also refer to our intention to alter the perceptions of others for reasons that are other than honest.

are you doing the “manipulating” to the images you are using purely for the sake of the image, or are your aims actually to “manipulate” the viewers of the image

You ask a good point. I remember the Kate Winslet “long thin legs on GQ” cover & I was horrified. I’d always thought she was the one fine example of healthy womanhood in Hollywood (just my opinion folks) & thought GQ’s choice to do this sent a terrible message about body image to the women of the world. Sadly this continues to be done on a daily basis with almost every magazine cover I look at.

Personally, I’d prefer to see photomanipulation in the realms of the “art” world. It would be lovely indeed to see some truth in our current affairs & advertising…… it’ll never happen though.

Sybille Sterk Sybille Sterk 1472 posts

Wow, fab article! I bet this kind of tampering has been going on in oil paintings as well.

The point Dragonflyer raises is a good one. However, I think manipulating the viewer’s view point doesn’t have to be a negative thing, as in all things, there are two sides. You can use the manipulation to make a point, to show a different side or argument, which is something I regularly do. Each image no matter if it’s manipulated or not has a ‘viewpoint’ and a ‘view’ or opinion that is transferred from the artist to the viewer.

I agree with Rosemary – photo manipulation is an art form whereas photo tampering is a propaganda tool. Very different.

DragonFlyer DragonFlyer 2263 posts

I agree with you Magpie – I would not call “making a point, showing a different side or argument” manipulating a viewer.

I would call those sort of aims in creating a work “education or aiming to inform”… I try to do that too.

It’s a deliberate falsifying with the aim of converting people to FALSE and MISLEADING views that is tampering – and very interesting what images from history are now known to be clearly “tampered with”…

I wonder – do people now consider that it makes any difference at all knowing that the body of the person in that “iconic” portrait of Abraham Lincoln is not, in fact, Lincoln himself??? (though – it certainly DOES make me wonder what the photographer felt Lincoln “lacked” that this other “body” didn’t…. ;)))

desktop tablet-landscape content-width tablet-portrait workstream-4-across phone-landscape phone-portrait
desktop tablet-landscape content-width tablet-portrait workstream-4-across phone-landscape phone-portrait