Steve
McCurry’s use of photoshop in his submissions for National Geographic became
mainstream news in 2016. He worked as a visual journalist for nearly 40 years
documenting his experiences and covering stories around the world, earning a place
as one of the most heralded and recognizable photographers of the 21st
century. As a photojournalist, it is expected of him to portray the truth of
what he sees in his photos. Personally, I believe the use of photoshop in the
cases presented are so minimal it should not be considered against the code of
conduct for photojournalism and cost him his career. The purpose of a
photojournalist, as presented in the Photojournalism Code of Ethics by NPPA, is
to “Respect the integrity of the photographic moment” and “Be accurate and
comprehensive in the representation of subjects” (NPPA). To me, this essentially
means to maintain the original intended meaning or message of the photo. For
example, a popular criticism of McCurry’s work is that of the African children
playing with a ball (Cade). He was called out for removing an arm from the
image that was cut off from the rest of the child in the frame, as well as an
entire child that appeared displeasingly behind the most-forefront subject of
the image. These changes did no harm to the meaning of the work, which was to show
these children from a foreign, third-world country playing just as kids from a
first-world country would. By removing a distracting shape or color-correcting
an image taken in the field does nothing to take away from an image’s
integrity, but rather enhances the image to viewers by making it more visually attractive
and aesthetically pleasing.
A general
National Geographic rule states, “National Geographic supports ethical
photography that accurately represents cultures, ecosystems, and wildlife” (Your
Shot). Regarding this, I believe McCurry was in the right by editing his own
photos because they are his artistic property. While it is true that his
submissions for his job must meet very specific qualifications, I believe that
his edits were valid within the requirements. The general ethics of
photojournalism states that the photographer should not alter anything
significant regarding the subject or any drastic political or newsworthy subject.
The purpose of the photos McCurry was caught editing were nothing of reporting
or political significance, but rather more for a anecdotal piece about his
travel experiences or a non-critical story he was told to report on. Photoshopping
his work had no effect on how people perceive the images; people still see
nothing but African children playing despite a child being removed from the
frame for composition purposes. I believe that McCurry’s career should not have
been jeopardized for taking a small amount of photo ownership and artistic
liberty when it came to making his images better for both himself and viewers.
People overreacted to such slight alterations and completely ignored the
artistic side to photography and photojournalism.
Works
Cited
"The Code of Ethics." NPPA: The Voice of Visual
Journalists, 2017, nppa.org/
code-ethics.
Accessed 23 July 2018.
Cade, DL. "Botched Steve McCurry Print Leads to
Photoshop Scandal."
PetaPixel, 6 May
2016, petapixel.com/2016/05/06/
botched-steve-mccurry-print-leads-photoshop-scandal/. Accessed 23 July
2018.
"Your Shot." National Geographic,
yourshot.nationalgeographic.com/
photo-guidelines/. Accessed 23 July 2018.
No comments:
Post a Comment