It was of Alfried Krupp. But I do not think it was Karsh; I think it was Newman.
Well, at least she manipulate photos she took herself and not by others.
I am reminded of the photo taken by Yousuf Karsh of the WWII German industrialist (Kulp?). He purposefully lit the his face from underneath to make him look as evil as he supposively was (slave labor, etc). Haven't heard a word of censure about that image. Sorry, tried to find a copy of the image online, but could not.
Vaughn
There is in most cases. For any such assignment I did for magazines, my contract always specified that I not use the images resulting from the shoot until anywhere from 30 - 90 days after initial publication. This is most likely why the magazine feels they have grounds to sue. Otherwise, the images belong to the photographer and after the agreed upon time can be used for other editorial purposes. What surprises me is that the McCain people allowed her to photograph him in the first place. They must not have done their homework.I find it rather astonishing that there isn't some legal clause that photographers sign before they are hired for such things.
They hired a photographer who behaved at best, like a childish brat, and at worse... completely unethically. She was there representative.
I looked at her website and could not find the photos except the cover.
They hired a photographer who behaved at best, like a childish brat, and at worse... completely unethically. She was there representative.
I used to work for a news magazine, and when I hired a photographer who was working for us, I expected them to behave professionally and ethically. They had to apologize for her behavior. The Atlantic, I have no doubt, will take McCain to task, though I have not seen, nor read the Oct. issue, but drawing little devil horns, and using lighting setups designed to deceive is hardly the way they would want to present meaningful political debate.
I don't think the apology is inappropriate... her behavior was.
The unethical thing would have been to help mccain by presenting him to the public in a normal light when she felt otherwise. At least she had the guts to show how she really felt. She didnt let herself be used to advance the career of a politician she dislikes.
... do you think that people such as Hogarth, Gillray, Cruikshank and Heartfield, whom I mentioned earlier, and for that matter the creators of the British "Spitting Image" TV show, later copied in many other countries, should be taken out and shot for the crime of irredeemable vulgarity?
Just for my own information - do you recognize the function and validity of political caricature in any form? Or do you think that people such as Hogarth, Gillray, Cruikshank and Heartfield, whom I mentioned earlier, and for that matter the creators of the British "Spitting Image" TV show, later copied in many other countries, should be taken out and shot for the crime of irredeemable vulgarity?
If it was in her contract that she could use the pix for personal use, then - "right" or not - her butt is covered, and Atlantic needs to learn to write better contracts...and John McCain needs to sign better contracts. As a lawmaker, he should be able to tell what to sign and what not to sign...or at least have his advisers inform him if he doesn't have the time himself.
SNIP<
.
Keith, she has a right to do what she wants with her photos, I'm not particularly interested in seeing what she did this time. But she is known for her manipulation of images, so what's the big deal.
Suzzanne Revvy raise a good point , but in the long run Jill Greenberg has mainly only affected her own credibility. Newspapers world wide tamper with and manipulate images in far more insidious ways. At least Gill Greenburg's manipulation is obvious, and she doesn't hide that's what she does.
Ian
The basic fact is that all "news" is edited, you can trust it to the point of humor and no farther...EC
The unethical thing would have been to help mccain by presenting him to the public in a normal light when she felt otherwise. At least she had the guts to show how she really felt. She didnt let herself be used to advance the career of a politician she dislikes.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?