HOME | ABOUT | CONTACT | Magazine
Search:

Inspiration for digital creatives

NEW! Topic Zones

Digital Arts cover

Buy latest issue NOW!

Creating cutting edge vector art
Master light & shadow
Paint with fire
Graduate showcase
Urban typography
£405 of stock images, fonts & vectors

EDIGIT SIGN-UP

The twice-weekly newsletter with all the latest creative news, reviews, and features



More info...


ipad

The Complete Guide to the iPad

Packed with tips and tricks, the top 50 apps you must download & over 80 pages of step-by step tutorials.
Buy NOW for just £5.99, a saving of 40% off the retail price.

The golden touch

Tuesday 13 Sep 2005

Life isn’t perfect – unless you’re a professional image manipulator with the power to alter reality. Digit spoke to the best in the business.

border=0 /><BR></div> </p> <p> The well-known adage “the camera never lies” is going out of date. The idea that what you see is what you get just doesn’t hold anymore, because what you get with a camera is very rarely what you see on the page. From abs muscles to zits, arses to T-zones, nothing is exempt from the professional retoucher’s virtual brush. </p> <p> Digit took the time to go beyond appearances to ask what kind of changes photos go through before they hit the pages of glossy magazines, and to investigate whether there are any limits to this digital art. </p> <div class=inlineimage><img src=@digital_arts on Twitter.


Submit to: DiggDigg deliciousDel.icio.us redditReddit

What is this?

Famous cases of photoshop gone bananas

Kate Winslet wasn’t the first famous face to fall foul of the retoucher’s brush. The history annals have endless cases of retouching gone mental.

border=0 /><BR></div> </p> <p> <b>Martha Stewart & Newsweek</b> </p> <p> In March this year, a cover of Newsweek in the US featuring Martha Stewart and the headline ‘Martha’s Last Laugh’ caused a huge fuss. Stewart, who was released from prison earlier this year after a criminal prosecution, featured on the front cover emerging from behind some curtains. The problem was the picture featured Stewart’s head superimposed on the body of a model, photographed separately in a Los Angeles studio. </p> <p> The decision by Newsweek was labelled a ‘major ethical breach’ by The National Press Photographers Association. Although it mentioned on page three of the magazine that the image was ‘an illustration’, the NPPA argued that the average reader wouldn’t know it wasn’t Martha Stewart’s body in the photograph. </p> <p> The NPPA guidelines on the manipulation of images read as follows: “As journalists, we believe that credibility is our greatest asset. In documentary photojournalism, it is wrong to alter the content of a photograph in any way (electronically or in the darkroom) that deceives the public. We believe the guidelines for fair and accurate reporting should be the criteria for judging what may be done electronically to a photograph.” </p> <p> As a result of the furore surrounding the cover, Newsweek editor Mark Whitaker changed the magazine’s byline and crediting policy. Now, bylines and illustration credit lines will appear directly on the front cover rather than inside the magazine or in the table of contents. </p> <p> <div class=inlineimage><img src=
HOME | TERMS & CONDITIONS | ABOUT | CONTACT | ADVERTISERS | All contents ©IDG 2010 by IDG Network
Top of page TOP