Reply to topic  [ 4996 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233 ... 334  Next
The Ranting (or Venting) Thread. 
Author Message
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:29 pm
Posts: 5975
Reply with quote
Someone I know on Facebook has decided to post the name and age of each palestinian casualty - in separate posts, one at a time.

_________________
"I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet." - Stanislaw Lem


Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:07 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
Well that's about as pointless a form of protest as I can think of.


Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:10 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
I saw a photo of a pile of rubble with a broken child's wheelchair on top of it. Now, there's no way that wheelchair got there on it's own and frankly there's no way someone sat in it could get it up there. It was placed there deliberately, 'posed' for the photograph.


Perhaps, or perhaps not. Perhaps someone put it there out of the way rather than leaving it lying around in the way, this person may or may not have been the photographer. War is a funny place. Last year brought this up (also featuring some distraught Palestinians) where the photographer was accused of manipulating the image.

So would asking a soldier to pose at his checkpoint with a rifle raised be ok? Asking a grieving woman to show the camera the passport of her dead husband be ok? Where is the line drawn between this is ok but that isn't?
The notion that war photojournalism is entirely passive isn't true, and nor should it be.

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:13 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
To be honest, when we're talking about photojournalism, I don't really see much difference between manipulating an image post facto in photoshop and manipulating an image by amending the scene at the time the photo is taken. Both are presenting the story the photographer wants us to see, not the story that is actually there. And that's dangerous. If a journalist deliberately left a section of a story out or added details in that weren't there without making it obvious that they were later embellishments on their part, would that be acceptable? No, it absolutely would not and the journalist would be panned for it. And if they did make it obvious, the publication would feel obliged to publish it as opinion, not fact. I don't want someone's opinion in a photograph, I want the facts.

ProfessorF wrote:
So would asking a soldier to pose at his checkpoint with a rifle raised be ok? Asking a grieving woman to show the camera the passport of her dead husband be ok? Where is the line drawn between this is ok but that isn't?

Simple, it just isn't. None of it. Just stand there and take the photo of what's happening. Be an observer. That's a really easy line to stick to.

ProfessorF wrote:
The notion that war photojournalism is entirely passive isn't true, and nor should it be.

I think it should. It should be reportage, not editorial. If you have to 'dress up' the conflict to make your photos seem powerful a) You're distorting the events that happened which is not 'journalism' as it should be and/or b) You're not a good enough photographer.

The images of war will speak for themselves, saying whatever they need to say. An unadulterated photo tells the truth. We have the right to expect the truth from the people who are there to show us what is happening in places like Gaza.


Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:19 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
Simple, it just isn't. None of it. Just stand there and take the photo of what's happening. Be an observer. That's a really easy line to stick to.


However, your presence with a camera will affect how people around you react. You become part of the situation - people either will interact with you to show you something, or they'll try and ignore you with no regard for you being there. Some might actively send you away in a variety of ways. Some might involve guns.

jonbwfc wrote:
I think it should. It should be reportage, not editorial. If you have to 'dress up' the conflict to make your photos seem powerful a) You're overstating &distorting the events that happened which is not 'journalism' as it should be and/or b) You're not a good enough photographer.

The images of war will speak for themselves, saying whatever they need to say. An unadulterated photo tells the truth. We have the right to expect the truth from the people who are there to show us what is happening in places like Gaza.


Any item of information is relayed via a medium, whether it's your mate in the pub or a screed of text in a publication. All of it is subject to the whims of our own internal editors before it even reaches an outlet. Simply by choosing your frame, or by selecting which images you present you are already presenting a version of the truth. There is no absolute truth in photography, just what someone wants us to see, and we put our trust in them to present their version of the truth - much like any other journalist might do.

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Wed Jul 30, 2014 9:44 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
ProfessorF wrote:
However, your presence with a camera will affect how people around you react. You become part of the situation - people either will interact with you to show you something, or they'll try and ignore you with no regard for you being there. Some might actively send you away in a variety of ways. Some might involve guns.

That doesn't give you the right to manipulate the image you're taking as you wish to fit an agenda. That's not journalism.

ProfessorF wrote:
Any item of information is relayed via a medium, whether it's your mate in the pub or a screed of text in a publication. All of it is subject to the whims of our own internal editors before it even reaches an outlet. Simply by choosing your frame, or by selecting which images you present you are already presenting a version of the truth. There is no absolute truth in photography, just what someone wants us to see, and we put our trust in them to present their version of the truth - much like any other journalist might do.

Oh I agree - at the end of the day there's always the choice to take a photo or not take a photo. However a photograph, as long as we trust it to not have been manipulated, is an objective recording of a moment in time the way a retold story or written word simply is not. To say that because all photographs involve some level of subjectivity - possibly at a very metaphorical level - any manipulation of any photograph is acceptable is a spurious argument. It's like saying that because we can't ever remember all the exact details of any given situation therefore outright lying about that situation is fine. "What is truth?" has never been an argument anybody honest has ever had to try.

The job of the photojournalist is to relay by images the truth of the situation in which they are placed. Not to decide what they think about the situation they are in and then manipulate the image to attempt to convince the viewer to share that opinion. Arguably, there is a place for photographs that do that but I would say they should be in art galleries, not on the front page of newspapers.


Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:03 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
That doesn't give you the right to manipulate the image you're taking as you wish to fit an agenda. That's not journalism.


My point was that by simply attending an event, you become a part of that experience. It's impossible to be an entirely neutral observer, as your subject will likely react differently to your presence than if you weren't there. Cameras are not invisible.

jonbwfc wrote:
Oh I agree - at the end of the day there's always the choice to take a photo or not take a photo. However a photograph, as long as we trust it to not have been manipulated, is an objective recording of a moment in time the way a retold story or written word simply is not. To say that because all photographs involve some level of subjectivity - possibly at a very metaphorical level - any manipulation of any photograph is acceptable is a spurious argument. It's like saying that because we can't ever remember all the exact details of any given situation therefore outright lying about that situation is fine. "What is truth?" has never been an argument anybody honest has ever had to try.


By manipulation, do you include altering your framing or asking someone to step into the light? Or more specifically post production? Referring back to your initial observation that the wheel chair on the rubble was 'posed' - what evidence do you have for that position? That it doesn't feel 'right' to your notion of what a war zone should look like?
If we accept that the photographer may as likely have been following your model of purely observational documentary photography, as being as likely that he deliberately placed the chair there, then what is the difference?
The image being judged by us doesn't change, only our own notions of what preceded the image being taken.
Your personal judgement of the image is that it was staged (although I'm not sure why that should be the case, it doesn't seem that incredible). I don't see that as necessarily being the case, nor that it matters in the greater context of covering this horrific event.


jonbwfc wrote:
The job of the photojournalist is to relay by images the truth of the situation in which they are placed. Not to decide what they think about the situation they are in and then manipulate the image to attempt to convince the viewer to share that opinion. Arguably, there is a place for photographs that do that but I would say they should be in art galleries, not on the front page of newspapers.

I would suggest it's impossible for anyone to be in a war zone and not make decisions about what's happening around them. If you want that, perhaps some sort of time lapse drone photographer might be a better news gathering device. News outlets have guidelines about what is acceptable in the production of an image, and rightly so.
Anyway, a thoroughly enjoyable exchange. :)

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Thu Jul 31, 2014 12:51 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 5836
Reply with quote
This place gets more retarded by the day

:x

_________________
Jim

Image


Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:13 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
rustybucket wrote:
This place gets more retarded by the day

:x


So does mine:

Quote:
How will it operate?
· Entry will always be possible while the parking areas are open for use.
· Exiting will be unhindered between 06.00 - 10.00 hrs Monday to Saturday. However to exit the car parks after 10.00hrs all users will require an Exit pass or to ‘Pay to Exit’.

(For a limited number of events special and Open Events free exit will be provided for all)

How do I get an ‘Exit pass’?
Individual Parking Permit holders, staff or students will automatically be provided with an Exit pass facility linked to their ID card and in line with their Parking Permit i.e. termly or of annual duration, if they have bought their Permit by Friday 26th September 2014.

After that date an Exit pass facility will be linked to their ID card by the end of the working day following the day the application for a Parking Permit is made.

Car Share permit holders will be provided with one separate Exit pass per pair or group of sharers. This will not be linked to their ID cards. The Estates Office will issue an Exit pass for each pair or group of sharers to use.
(Reminder: Car sharers will be entitled to park in a ‘car share concession parking bay’ only when they are sharing i.e. have 1 or more passenger. They will not be entitled to park in a ‘car share concession parking bay’ on days they do not share. The use of concession bays will be regularly monitored and reviewed as necessary.)

Staff and students who do not have a Permit, casual users and visitors will pay cash to exit. The charge will be a flat rate of £1 per stay to exit after 10.00hrs when the car parks are open for use.

What will the controls be like?
To enter - You will enter the car park through an ‘entry lane’. There will be two entrances; one from Long Road roundabout and one as the roadway enters our car parks from the Brixham Road entrance.
You will pass over speed reduction humps and ‘flow plates’ to control the flow of traffic.

To exit – If you have a Permit then just touch your ID card/Exit pass to the contact plate on the Exit Station to raise the barrier. If you don’t have a Permit then pay £1 to exit at the Exit Station. Special concessions can be provided with a day ticket which can only be used once.

An audio link is available at the barrier to ask advice or summon assistance if you have a problem.


I spend enough time queueing to leave work as it is!

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:50 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
Bloody clients. Here's a situation for you. They have a website, but they don't like the current host. So I copy all the data and files to my server, where it works. All we need is the log in credentials for the domain name so I can change the name servers. Can we get that info? It seems not. Why? Because they are all older men, and one rather frail one seems to have this information. He can't find it. They have transferred the domain name from him to someone else, but he is still getting the emails about service renewals. This tells me that he's not given the new owner the login credentials, so the contact details for the domain name are wrong.

Got an email today saying that there are no log in details. Thing is, if anyone kicks off a password reset for the domain name the email will go to the original old boy. I get an email about this today. I'm taking the next two weeks off.

This has been going on for months - and I seem unable to resolve this. It is maddening. It's like herding cats.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:00 am
Profile
Spends far too much time on here
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:40 pm
Posts: 4876
Location: Newcastle
Reply with quote
gitignores that are blindly ignored......

_________________
Twitter
Charlie Brooker:
Macs are glorified Fisher-Price activity centres for adults; computers for scaredy cats too nervous to learn how proper computers work; computers for people who earnestly believe in feng shui.


Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:17 am
Profile
Official forum cat lady
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
Reply with quote
rustybucket wrote:
This place gets more retarded by the day

:x


Are you talking about work, this forum or both? ;)

_________________
Still the official cheeky one ;)

jonbwfc wrote:
Caz is correct though


Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:50 am
Profile
Legend

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
Taxi arrived quickly earlier and I didn't grab my key because there's always someone in the house. So of course my parents have decided to do the shopping at Monday rush hour. Utter fcuking idiots.

_________________
Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/


Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:30 pm
Profile
Legend

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
And the idiocy continues. Captain Spastic is tiling the upstairs bathroom and apparently this is best achieved by slamming items into the floor so hard that the kitchen light flashes.

In the middle of this the phone goes and it's someone with an indecipherable Irish accent from The Door Store - 'I'll get my dad to call you back, he's busy' says I. This then starts a massive argument with the Captain. Apparently he'd been waiting all day for this call. Yeah, it's my fault some genius waited until 8pm to get back to you and that I'm not psychic :x

I lent this cnut and my mother £600 just a few hours beforehand, so I mean really?

_________________
Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/


Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:23 pm
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm
Posts: 12143
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
Ernie, families, eh?

Mark

_________________
okenobi wrote:
All I know so far is that Mark, Jimmy Olsen and Peter Parker use Nikon and everybody else seems to use Canon.
ShockWaffle wrote:
Well you obviously. You're a one man vortex of despair.


Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:47 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 4996 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233 ... 334  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.