Warp wrote:
>   Perhaps a bit sadly, some people have got way *too* wary of any kind
> of photo which contains anything out of ordinary. Many real (and sometimes
> amazing) photographs are dismissed as fakes, often with no evidence of
> fakery whatsoever (other than "it's too amazing to be true").

	I think it's a different perspective. After taking a seminar on well,
"new media" in my undergrad, the most important lesson I learned was
never to consider any photo as real - even one I know I took.

	While that's extreme, I can understand someone being skeptical of any
photograph he/she didn't take. As you pointed out, it can be _really_
hard to tell if a well processed photo is a fake. This was true even
before you had digital imaging. So photos shouldn't really be relied
upon as evidence. IOW, all photos are fake unless I really trust the guy
who took the photo.

	It's (one) reason why I ignore photographs in political news.

	

-- 
A man attempting to walk around the world DROWNED today...


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message