I disagree, partially: The agencies were right to kill the photo, and to let people know it did.It's just another dead cat to divert attention away from the important stuff.
Stops people noticing what is actually happening and turning up on the doorstep with pitchforks and flaming torches to register their disapproval.
We really disagree here.I am friends with a professional photographer.
He is quite open about it. All digital data is just that, and it is routinely manipulated to present a pleasing image.
He never, ever, gives his raw data. Not even to the people who pay him for a finished product. There is no point, it's simply his baseline.
That's what the entitled arseholes are demanding.
It's none of their business.
They were given a photo to use, without copyright, free, gratis....and guess what? they're claiming it's not valid, not real.....uhuh.
Non story.
It's a Mum and her children, a happy photograph on Mother's Day.
All this brouhaha is just bile and spite and entitement...and they aren't entitled to anything other than the photo they were given.
Note; given, not charged for......unlike agency photos.
Normally your conversation is calm and well, considerate.
I totally fail to see why this issue is an issue. It's mince.
As for the family, and they are a family, it's just Mum posting a photo, and most folks thought it nice.
I feel heart sorry for them to be honest, they live under this intense nosey scrutiny, and it's not kind, it's vicarious and jealousy ridden bile and spite and the media egg it on.
My friend sells his photos, and yes it is art, but there's no way on this green earth that News photos are not also doctored. Reputable journalism is one thing, but any quick scan on the net shows just how often images are altered.
I utterly refuse to believe there is any real 'honour' among the paparazzi or editors looking to raise a fuss.
This wasn't even 'news', it was public interest, it was a happy sort of mothers day image.
Hardly worth the bother, so someone stirred it up.
Aye, indeed. The world's gone nuts, and peeping Toms and Tomasinas have their phones and cameras everywhere.
It's all rather sad.
Was it AI ? I thought Catherine just said that she'd played around with it herself.....just like Mum's do, or I think she actually said something along the lines of like many amateur photographers do.Like with all things it's degrees isn't it. People lie all the time but we still have libel and slander laws for example. There has been a growing problem with fake AI imagery because the impact it could have on society is significant. That the palace released a picture to the press with the hallmarks of an AI manipulated image is a big deal - it's a completely different prospect to airbrushing out a pimple or changing some lighting.
What editing is allowed by agencies?
Photo agencies have a very low tolerance for any digital alteration of images.
For example, the AP's photo standards allow minor photo editing, such as cropping and colour adjustments "when necessary for clear and accurate reproduction" - but say an image "should maintain the authentic nature of the photograph."
Backgrounds should not be digitally blurred, and changes to the contrast or saturation levels that substantially alter the original scene are not permissible.
Arthur Edwards, a Royal photographer for the Sun, spoke to the BBC and described the process of submitting photos to agencies.
"You photograph it, you can crop it, you can put a bit of sharpener on it if you have to... and then you send it," Mr Edwards said.
"You don't alter the actual picture itself. For instance, if one of the people in the picture has red eye, you can't take the red eye out, you have to leave it as it is."
Amen.Was it AI ? I thought Catherine just said that she'd played around with it herself.....just like Mum's do, or I think she actually said something along the lines of like many amateur photographers do.
I don't think we're ever going to agree on the unimportance/importance of this.
Honestly ? life's too short to quibble over someone's Mother's Day snap
At least we've forgotten about Ukraine and Gaza. Fuck em when there's a dodgy family photo to witter about.
Britain 2024 and a sign of things to come.Protesters trespass for ‘right to roam’ at Cirencester Park in the Cotswolds
The park had been free to access for centuries, but now electric pedestrian gates have been installed and visitors are being chargedwww.telegraph.co.uk