OK, so photos of women photoshopped to make them look like they've been beaten up are OK on photonet?

[ray .]

Emailed Tony and Josh on Leica forum- No reply. Don't know if Brian

read my comment in 'so, how about fairness' thread below, but he should

have since he made a comment after mine. No deletion of the 2nd

picture

on this thread: <p>

 

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009R5S">

link</a><p>

 

What am I missing here? Is this now officially condoned by the upper

ups? This is a real person somewhere. How about a lawsuit if she sees

it?

[jbs]

Why should the picture be deleted Ray?

[kelly_flanigan1]

It looks like the same photo posted several days ago; but modified with several dark airbrush spots.

[scott_eaton]

More proof the Leica forum serves absolutely no benefit to the photographic community in any form except to safely keep these guys away from playgrounds.

 

If I were the girl in the photo, I'd be hiring a lawyer. If you read the thread, they are more offended that he didn't use a Leica vs the photo doctoring, which I find flat out ill. Next week they'll be whining about more erosion of their rights to lurk around the streets in trenchcoats.

 

More credit to the moderators for tolerating it - it's not their fault, nor do I think Brian and Co. would endorse such activity.

[ray .]

If it's OK with you Jay then let's take a picture of you and do the same to it and post it here. I can't believe you've had to ask the question you did.

 

Some photographers might see it as a pic with a couple air brush spots on it, but they'd be the minority of the general population. And even if you see the air brush spots, it's pretty clear what it's portraying.

[ray .]

You know, it's not any different really than a few guys hanging out cracking jokes about beating up some girl or raping her and laughing about it.

[lex_jenkins]

Ray, I think it's a bit of a far reach to leap from an altered photograph to condoning violence and sexual assault. Unless the person who altered and uploaded the photo specifically admitted this was the intent (I'm not interested enough to read the rest of the thread), you're making some pretty unsupportable accusations. He may be guilty of little more than a lame sense of humor.

[ray .]

Lex, I didn't say they were condoning violence of this nature, but their finding it material for humor seems a little sick to me. But even disregarding that, there's a difference between, say, making a film on the subject using an actress who's volunteeed and getting paid for her performance, and just taking someone's photo off the internet and transforming it to this.

 

I guess it's OK with you too if we take a photo of you and without your permission make it look like this?

[nomade]

Damn! The shot seems to have been deleted. Do you keep a copy to repost it here...?

[edward_h]

> Damn! The shot seems to have been deleted. Do you keep a copy to repost it here...?

 

That's the great thing about 1984, you can delete pictures and threads and act as if they never existed...

[mike_morgan1]

<blockquote><i>You know, it's not any different really than a few guys hanging out cracking jokes about beating up some girl or raping her and laughing about it.</i></blockquote>

 

<p><p> The ironic part is, your type (PC-indoctrinated) would be offended if the government tried to limit where and when groups who take taxpayer funds are able to promote abortion as birth control, but yet you think it is just fine to use censorship, ostracism and ridicule to limit and control what Archie Bunker finds humorous.

<p><p>P.S. I didn't see the photo, but am responding to a lame shot taken by Ray the Suppressor.

[ray .]

Well Mike, I guess there needs to be some sort of political correctness, otherwise you'd have pure anarchy. By the way, I think you better go back and watch some Archie Bunker shows. Whatever he was, he wasn't someone who would go along with taking an innocent person's photograph and doctoring it this way and violating their right to personal dignity (of course you admit you didn't see it anyway).

 

Thanks to the moderators.

[Spearhead]

The issue isn't political correctness, although that photograph was offensive and pointless, and would have been deleted more quickly if I was a moderator on that forum for that reason alone. The real issue with the latered photograph is that posting it created a legal problem. What was done is clearly illegal in most, if not all, states in the United States and could have been used for a lawsuit. Photo.net has to remove photos that create a legal problem, and that photo did represent a liability for photo.net.

[Tony Rowlett]

What is a good trench coat to buy these days?

[jsbc]

Btw, is it OK for p'netters to download pictures that others have created from someone's portfolio and/or previous threads, alter it, and post it somewhere else, WITHOUT PERMISSION?

 

I think this should be a matter of principle that we respect other people's copywrite.

 

It is also not a good joke since the mutiliated images were, if I remember correctly, posted on multiple threads.

[jbs]

Ray,

I asked the question because you were unclear and typing from a state of exaggerated emotion.

 

When I breifly looked at the image in question I had no idea what the heck you were talking about and, since I don't read much of the Lieca forum, I based my question solely on your post here and the one image I saw.

 

Is that OK Ray? And no, it was not,"...pretty clear what it's portraying." Based on the above......Calm down Ray, the world will not come to an end even if you (the Majority) are offended.....;)....J<div></div>