Even when your mama wears army boots, she still wants to look pretty ...

[gr82bart]

Dead Link Removed

Has the army gone too far?

Regards, Art.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

When I was growing up the shout "Yo Mama wears Army boots" was an invitation to fight. Now it's meaning has changed to "Wow, cool Mama!".

 

[Dan Henderson]

What a remarkable achievement for the first woman to rise to that level. And then to have the success compromised like this. I am assuming that male general's photographs are not similarly altered, but I suppose one never knows.

 

[arigram]

Well, its not like they shown her wearing just the boots and nothing else...

 

[Ian Leake]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3602195

Arguably all they're doing is reflecting society's general acceptance of fake photos - adverts, magazines, holiday snaps, general's portraits - what's the difference? It's also arguable that portraits have been routinely improved upon for generations. All that being said, the fake tan and lurid flag are a bit amateurish and tacky. I also wonder why they couldn't have just had a photographer make a quick portrait at her promotion ceremony and release that one.

 

[Dan Henderson]

Ian: thanks for posting the link to the pictures. The first article that I went to did not have them. I agree: they are amateurish and tacky alterations, and every recruit in the army gets his or her photograph taken during basic training, so I am sure that a full general would have no problem getting a portrait made very quickly.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

So what... They should have shot the photographer who took the original photograph, not the one who tried to fix the disaster. If retouched portraits are out then there goes every pre-perp-walk picture of every politico. Not to mention anything on the obits and wedding announcements pages.

I agree, though, they should have had a proper photograph taken.

 

[JBrunner]

Just bad all around. The brave new world of photography...

 

[winger]

Believe me, there are plenty of good photos of General Dunwoody. She got her photo taken (I think with her husband, iirc) just ahead of us at the Army Ball last spring. She was in a rush to get in and start stuff (she was sorta in charge), but wanted her photos taken. This altered one probably started as a snapshot and turned out to be the only one someone had. So they did a bad job of making it look not like a snapshot. Should they have? Obviously not.

 

[arigram]

The plot thickens:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7738342.stm
Pretty soon they will be demanding photographs in film with the negative inspected...

 

[michaelbsc]

So, "For us, there's a zero-tolerance policy of adding or subtracting actual content from an image," said Santiago Lyon, the AP's director of photography.

But what about the Iranian missile test last year? Or the staged photo's of the "victims" of various bombings in the Middle East, with the same 10 people in 40 different angles.

The AP, and the vast majority of the rest of the news organizations today, have as much credibility as a porn dealer in my mind. At least the porn industry is honest that all they really want is your money.