5 ms·
I find it quite amazing that the photographer even bothered to 'shop the photo. It seems to me as irrationality on his or his editors' part. In this case, I do
by byteCoder 17y ago
I find it quite amazing that the photographer even bothered to 'shop the photo. It seems to me as irrationality on his or his editors' part.
In this case, I don't think the doctoring of the photo affects the substance of the article. However, that said, this is certainly an ethical lapse that should be soundly rejected by the New York Times' readership.
- potatolicious 17y agoI'm confused as to why the photo was altered in the first place - even without the shop job it was quite striking in its symmetry.
- TrevorJ 17y agoFrom what I understand, you aren't seeing the truly original photo in either of those examples. You are seeing the published versions, and the 'mirrored' version. They are attempting to prove that the published version was also mirrored by looking at the comparison of the 2.