WEBVTT - Photo Editing and Manipulation, Part Two 0:00:04.360 --> 0:00:11.400 Get Text of Technology with tex staff from hosts dot com. 0:00:11.400 --> 0:00:14.560 Hey there, and welcome to text Stuff. I'm Johnson Strickland 0:00:14.600 --> 0:00:18.480 and join me again. Is Dylan done? Go back, thank you, 0:00:18.840 --> 0:00:21.680 And we are now going to talk more about photo manipulation. 0:00:22.200 --> 0:00:24.520 Now we're going to move into the post digital era. 0:00:24.680 --> 0:00:27.760 So in our first episode we really concentrated on the 0:00:27.800 --> 0:00:31.400 science of photography and how when we're talking about a 0:00:31.440 --> 0:00:36.360 physical medium, something like film or plates or physical negatives, 0:00:36.800 --> 0:00:42.040 the manipulation was very painstaking in some cases and required 0:00:42.479 --> 0:00:44.680 a lot of work on the part of the photographer. 0:00:45.440 --> 0:00:49.680 And the story changes dramatically once we get especially once 0:00:49.720 --> 0:00:53.040 we get well into the post digital era, where we're 0:00:53.040 --> 0:00:59.240 now talking about files not necessarily physical media, and it 0:00:59.360 --> 0:01:02.720 opens up a whole new world of possibilities. Yeah. Now 0:01:02.880 --> 0:01:06.479 it's you know, images on computers. That's nothing new. We've 0:01:06.480 --> 0:01:09.400 had those for quite some time. I would argue that 0:01:09.480 --> 0:01:14.039 perhaps the pivotal moment in the post digital era would 0:01:14.040 --> 0:01:17.560 be nineteen eighties seven. That's when you have a PhD 0:01:17.640 --> 0:01:21.040 student at the University of Michigan named Thomas Noel who 0:01:21.040 --> 0:01:24.160 builds a program for the Mac Plus. He calls it display. 0:01:24.520 --> 0:01:27.760 Oh yeah, yeah, Display everyone's using that these days, but 0:01:27.880 --> 0:01:29.600 they are, They just don't know. Yeah, they just it's 0:01:29.680 --> 0:01:33.399 just not called that anymore. Yeah. So in Night he 0:01:33.480 --> 0:01:37.759 and his brother John Noel. John Noel was an effects expert, 0:01:38.120 --> 0:01:42.040 a little company called Industrial Light and Magic. Yeah, so 0:01:42.080 --> 0:01:46.920 a little, little known Hollywood effects studio, just one of 0:01:47.000 --> 0:01:51.400 the smaller ones. Yeah, they put their heads together and 0:01:51.760 --> 0:01:54.120 together they come up with an idea. They decided to 0:01:54.160 --> 0:01:58.680 rename display and they call it Photoshop, and they license 0:01:58.760 --> 0:02:03.720 it to a manufacturer of slide scanners, and the manufacturers 0:02:03.760 --> 0:02:08.400 called Barney Scan. So the very first version of Photoshop, 0:02:08.440 --> 0:02:11.720 which was not version one point, oh, it preceded version 0:02:11.800 --> 0:02:16.000 one point It was version zero point eight seven. It 0:02:16.120 --> 0:02:20.200 was included with about two hundred scanners. So are about 0:02:20.200 --> 0:02:24.560 two hundred editions of Photoshop zero point eight seven out there? Wow, 0:02:24.639 --> 0:02:30.480 that's a yeah, I guess. And in nineteen nine they 0:02:30.520 --> 0:02:34.119 would sign a distribution deal with Adobe, and thus the 0:02:34.200 --> 0:02:40.120 relationship with Adobe and Photoshop begins. Was also when we 0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:46.399 get a famous incident of photo manipulation, a huge slap. 0:02:46.520 --> 0:02:50.880 I would say, this was a TV guide cover. I 0:02:50.880 --> 0:02:54.800 don't know if you're particularly familiar with this instance. It 0:02:54.919 --> 0:03:01.960 is Oprah so this was pretty awful, I would say, Yeah, 0:03:02.160 --> 0:03:05.520 So what what happened was TV Guide puts Oprah on 0:03:05.600 --> 0:03:08.799 the cover. That's not the egregious, nasty, horrible part. Now, 0:03:08.840 --> 0:03:13.120 that's that's perfectly fine. She was a ratings champion, absolutely 0:03:13.919 --> 0:03:16.880 deserved to be on the cover of TV Yeah. What 0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:19.440 what she did not deserve is is the way she 0:03:19.560 --> 0:03:23.920 was portrayed. So what happened was they had cut her 0:03:24.000 --> 0:03:27.920 head off of one picture and then superimposed it on 0:03:28.000 --> 0:03:31.320 top of the body of Anne Margaret and a ten 0:03:31.400 --> 0:03:35.920 year old photo of Ann Margaret at that from seventy nine. Yeah, 0:03:36.120 --> 0:03:41.040 nineteen seventy nine publicity shot of Anne Margaret, different woman, 0:03:41.320 --> 0:03:48.400 different race, and the It was immediately recognized by the 0:03:48.440 --> 0:03:51.120 fashion designer for Ann Margaret, the person who designed the 0:03:51.200 --> 0:03:55.200 dress and Margaret was wearing in that publicity photo and 0:03:55.440 --> 0:03:59.640 clearly was the same photo obviously the exact same pose 0:03:59.720 --> 0:04:02.960 and same body. It just had been manipulated so that 0:04:03.240 --> 0:04:06.960 it was supposed to like Oprah's body. This was not 0:04:07.280 --> 0:04:12.320 one of TV Guide's best moments, and it certainly was 0:04:12.360 --> 0:04:16.760 one of those that really brought the the this photo 0:04:16.839 --> 0:04:21.440 manipulation uh concept back into the public eye. Keep in 0:04:21.480 --> 0:04:24.400 mind that a lot of the manipulations we talked about 0:04:24.400 --> 0:04:28.480 in our first episode for a really long time, we're 0:04:28.520 --> 0:04:34.040 not necessarily public knowledge. People weren't aware that a lot 0:04:34.080 --> 0:04:36.360 of this was happening, you know. I think a lot 0:04:36.360 --> 0:04:40.320 of people still believed that when you see a photograph, 0:04:40.600 --> 0:04:43.440 what you're seeing is exactly the way it it rolled 0:04:43.480 --> 0:04:45.560 out in real life. And I think a lot of 0:04:45.600 --> 0:04:48.400 people now would still look at some of these photographs 0:04:48.400 --> 0:04:51.240 from like the eighteen sixties and not know that there 0:04:51.360 --> 0:04:54.760 was the ability to do manipulations like we're possible, right, 0:04:54.839 --> 0:04:56.640 So if you were looking at, say some of the 0:04:56.680 --> 0:04:59.799 spirit photography that we talked about in our last episode, 0:05:00.240 --> 0:05:04.240 you might be led to believe that somehow the photographers 0:05:04.240 --> 0:05:08.320 of the nineteenth century had an ability to capture spirits 0:05:08.320 --> 0:05:12.400 in photographs. They weren't. They use double exposure. Double exposure 0:05:12.440 --> 0:05:14.760 is no longer a thing. So maybe that's part of 0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:18.720 the problem, because unless you're using film double exposure like 0:05:18.720 --> 0:05:21.760 you could you could digitally create an effect that's like 0:05:21.800 --> 0:05:25.760 double exposure. You can overlay one layer and photoshop on 0:05:25.839 --> 0:05:29.720 another and change the opacity. Yes, but as far as 0:05:30.160 --> 0:05:35.360 putting two pictures on the same piece of film, it's 0:05:35.400 --> 0:05:38.440 not exactly the same. Yeah, yeah, it's it's I mean, 0:05:38.480 --> 0:05:40.680 you can you can fake it so that you get 0:05:40.720 --> 0:05:43.080 the same effect, but it's not it's definitely not the 0:05:43.120 --> 0:05:49.280 same process. Nine was when Adobe Photoshop one point oh 0:05:49.480 --> 0:05:53.520 would ship Happy Anniversary Photoshop. Hey, there you go. I 0:05:53.520 --> 0:05:56.080 didn't even make them do the math comes in English major, 0:05:56.240 --> 0:06:00.840 don't blame me. So here's here's something it's hard to believe. 0:06:02.080 --> 0:06:06.039 Adobe Photoshop one point oh fit on a single three 0:06:06.040 --> 0:06:10.920 and a half inch floppy disk. That's incredible. Yeah, yeah, yeah, 0:06:10.960 --> 0:06:14.039 you think about the size of those those programs now, 0:06:14.680 --> 0:06:18.280 and well, first of all, we don't use sloppy disks anymore. No, 0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:21.920 I don't know if Photoshop still I guess you can 0:06:21.920 --> 0:06:25.800 still physically, but most people download it from the cloud now, right, Yeah, 0:06:25.839 --> 0:06:29.440 you get a digital download and it's sizeable. It would 0:06:29.440 --> 0:06:31.800 take many three and a half inch disks to hold it. Now, 0:06:32.440 --> 0:06:35.920 and the Photoshop one point oh contained several of the 0:06:35.960 --> 0:06:39.560 tools that would later become the standard features of Photoshop. 0:06:39.760 --> 0:06:42.920 That's pretty amazing to me. Yeah, the clone tool was 0:06:42.960 --> 0:06:46.360 included in Photoshop one point oh. Yeah, and you you 0:06:46.360 --> 0:06:50.839 you already had the ability to select certain certain parts 0:06:50.880 --> 0:06:57.159 of an image and human saturation levels or tones. The 0:06:57.320 --> 0:07:00.960 thinking since I never used one point. Oh, thinking back 0:07:01.000 --> 0:07:05.400 and imagining that that was possible back then already in 0:07:05.440 --> 0:07:09.360 some form is is pretty amazing. Although the great thing 0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:13.320 about photoshop was that in comparison to its competitors, it 0:07:13.520 --> 0:07:17.840 was it was easier, more intuitive, and that's the way 0:07:17.840 --> 0:07:21.200 it was marketed. Right. So keep in mind that when 0:07:21.200 --> 0:07:24.400 we talked about in Part one, those those those means 0:07:24.480 --> 0:07:28.960 of manipulating and editing photos that was a specialized skill. 0:07:29.240 --> 0:07:32.160 Like if you were not a photographer, chances are you 0:07:32.200 --> 0:07:37.080 were unaware of how this this trickery or manipulation took place. 0:07:37.800 --> 0:07:40.840 And it's almost like you can almost think of it 0:07:40.920 --> 0:07:44.680 like a guild system. It wasn't formal like that, but 0:07:44.760 --> 0:07:46.240 it was this thing that if you were not part 0:07:46.240 --> 0:07:50.040 of that club, you were largely ignorant of what was 0:07:50.080 --> 0:07:53.200 going on in order for that stuff to happen. Uh. 0:07:53.240 --> 0:07:56.920 This approach meant that it suddenly became much more accessible. 0:07:56.920 --> 0:07:59.160 It's still had a barrier to entry. There was still 0:07:59.200 --> 0:08:02.640 a learning curve to be to be conquered, but it 0:08:02.720 --> 0:08:05.600 was much lower than say having to go and and 0:08:05.800 --> 0:08:10.200 roll in classes in photography and all the chemistry involved 0:08:10.240 --> 0:08:12.840 there was there was no longer chemistry involved, and there 0:08:12.920 --> 0:08:15.680 was no longer chemistry in a photo, which you didn't 0:08:15.680 --> 0:08:18.280 need to have chemistry to development, and you didn't have 0:08:18.320 --> 0:08:20.640 to go into the dark room and stand there with 0:08:20.680 --> 0:08:22.760 the tools if you wanted to lighten a part of 0:08:22.760 --> 0:08:25.640 an image or dark end. Yeah. I loved and you're 0:08:25.680 --> 0:08:27.960 in the part one you talked about the experience of 0:08:28.000 --> 0:08:31.240 going into a pitch black room in order to manipulate 0:08:31.280 --> 0:08:34.280 a camera so that you don't expose the film to light, 0:08:34.800 --> 0:08:38.599 thus ruining the film because obviously the film is as photoreactive. 0:08:38.760 --> 0:08:41.760 You can't. Since it's photoreactive, any light is going to 0:08:42.040 --> 0:08:45.280 make it react. And the idea of fumbling around in 0:08:45.320 --> 0:08:47.439 the dark that first time, where you're trying to build 0:08:47.480 --> 0:08:50.880 that familiarity, it made me think of every scene in 0:08:50.960 --> 0:08:54.680 every military movie where someone has to take apart a 0:08:54.760 --> 0:08:57.960 gun and then reassemble. It was like, this sounds like that, 0:08:58.000 --> 0:09:00.600 Like that, like after after week five, verse six, you 0:09:00.720 --> 0:09:03.840 just confidently just you're not even thinking about it's no 0:09:03.880 --> 0:09:06.800 longer conscious thought, it's just muscle memory. Yeah, and that 0:09:07.240 --> 0:09:10.720 that's that's great, But it's also great now as much 0:09:10.760 --> 0:09:12.600 as I love film photography. To do that on a 0:09:12.679 --> 0:09:15.560 daily basis is not as easy as taking a digital 0:09:15.679 --> 0:09:19.640 SLR and putting an SD card. Yeah, it turns out that, 0:09:19.720 --> 0:09:21.760 you know, you can even do that with the lights on. 0:09:22.080 --> 0:09:27.439 You can. Yeah, that's great. So. The cool thing also 0:09:27.480 --> 0:09:30.200 about Adobe Photoshop one point oh is it was being 0:09:30.360 --> 0:09:35.040 used for some really high profile, uh feature films at 0:09:35.080 --> 0:09:38.240 the time. There were actual effects studios that were using 0:09:38.440 --> 0:09:42.920 elements of Photoshop to work on composite digital shots of 0:09:42.960 --> 0:09:48.080 their films, including movies like The Abyss. So that's James 0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:51.600 Cameron's big movie that depending on which version you're seeing, 0:09:51.600 --> 0:09:54.960 you're dedicating about four hours of your life. Too. There's 0:09:54.960 --> 0:10:01.199 The Rocketeer, which highly underrated fantastic sci fi fantasy film. Yeah, yeah, 0:10:01.200 --> 0:10:04.080 I remember seeing that one of us really young. It's 0:10:04.080 --> 0:10:06.440 a it's great. It's a great movie. Go check it out. 0:10:06.440 --> 0:10:07.839 If you haven't seen The Rocket here, you got to 0:10:07.840 --> 0:10:09.679 see the Rocket here. So it's actually a really good 0:10:09.720 --> 0:10:14.320 superhero film. It just didn't get adopted by a larger 0:10:14.520 --> 0:10:17.760 audience the way some of the ones today did. Terminator 0:10:17.800 --> 0:10:20.040 two was one of the movies that phoms Shop one 0:10:20.080 --> 0:10:24.360 point oh influenced. Wow James Cameron. Ye, so if you uh, 0:10:24.640 --> 0:10:27.719 if you you know, if you really want to celebrate, 0:10:27.800 --> 0:10:31.560 give photoshop one point. I a very slowly descending thumbs up. 0:10:33.000 --> 0:10:35.679 And then one of one of a movie that I 0:10:35.760 --> 0:10:40.920 love despite its flaws, Hook, Steven Spielberg movie. Really Yeah, 0:10:41.000 --> 0:10:44.840 the the Steven Spielberg Retelling of Peter Pan, where Robin 0:10:44.920 --> 0:10:47.400 Williams is a grown up Peter Pan and Dustin Hoffman 0:10:47.559 --> 0:10:51.360 is Captain Hook. Uh. Dustin Hoffman, by the way, phenomenal 0:10:51.440 --> 0:10:53.839 Captain Hook, one of my I loved his performance. I 0:10:53.920 --> 0:10:56.280 wish there were more Hook in the movie Hook, because 0:10:56.280 --> 0:10:58.600 every time he was on screen, I was happy. It's 0:10:58.600 --> 0:11:01.400 just pretty phenomenal. Yeah. Uh. It was a totally different 0:11:02.160 --> 0:11:04.760 style of Hook than I was anticipating, and I loved 0:11:04.760 --> 0:11:08.800 every second of it. Anyway, all of those had influence 0:11:08.840 --> 0:11:12.199 from photoshop. There were digital composites, and we talked previously 0:11:12.240 --> 0:11:16.120 in the earlier episode about composite photographs. In that sense, 0:11:16.440 --> 0:11:19.600 there were composites that were completely made through analog methods 0:11:19.600 --> 0:11:22.280 where you're literally cutting and pasting either in a negative 0:11:22.280 --> 0:11:24.920 form or print form and taking a new photograph whatever 0:11:24.960 --> 0:11:28.520 it may be. But you were putting together two or 0:11:28.600 --> 0:11:32.800 more images to create a new image that's a composite 0:11:32.840 --> 0:11:35.880 of those previous ones. Now we're talking about doing the 0:11:35.920 --> 0:11:39.480 same thing but using digital tools, which gives you a 0:11:39.480 --> 0:11:43.680 lot more freedom. It does, and and soon thereafter I 0:11:43.720 --> 0:11:46.560 think three point oh was the introduction of layers, which 0:11:46.679 --> 0:11:52.040 changes everything. Yeah, you have non destructive editing. Please can 0:11:52.080 --> 0:11:55.200 you explain what that is? Non destructive editing is a 0:11:55.280 --> 0:12:01.080 godsend because, uh, I guess when those people maybe open 0:12:01.160 --> 0:12:03.960 up Photoshop for the first time and they're messing around, 0:12:04.040 --> 0:12:06.240 you see things like the eraser things that kind of 0:12:06.240 --> 0:12:08.240 makes sense. Like maybe if you ever opened up a 0:12:08.240 --> 0:12:10.040 picture in MS paint and you thought, like, I can 0:12:10.120 --> 0:12:14.360 paint on this. But once you do that, you're you're 0:12:14.400 --> 0:12:16.520 you're limited by how many times you can hit the 0:12:16.600 --> 0:12:21.959 undue button. But with layers, um you can continually add 0:12:22.000 --> 0:12:27.040 on different elements, on on different on. The best way 0:12:27.080 --> 0:12:29.040 to say is layers. So it's like putting pieces of 0:12:29.080 --> 0:12:32.360 paper over one another kind of clear acetate as maybe 0:12:32.920 --> 0:12:38.800 and and so if you uh subtract from one part 0:12:38.840 --> 0:12:40.760 of that layer, if you still have a copy of 0:12:40.800 --> 0:12:44.880 that underneath, nothing's going to happen to the original part 0:12:44.920 --> 0:12:46.560 of that image. You're and you're still going to have 0:12:46.640 --> 0:12:49.480 on the bottom layer. If you don't edit that layer 0:12:49.880 --> 0:12:52.160 the whole image, you're still going to have the whole image. 0:12:52.320 --> 0:12:55.560 So you have your original as the base, the foundation, yes, 0:12:55.640 --> 0:12:57.760 and then you lay other layers on top of it. 0:12:57.800 --> 0:13:00.480 That's where you can do your manipulation. And then you decide, 0:13:00.520 --> 0:13:03.120 maybe you decide, you know, I took that balloon out, 0:13:03.360 --> 0:13:05.360 but I actually kind of want that balloon back in. 0:13:05.440 --> 0:13:07.400 Now that I've done these other edits, I'm gonna go back, 0:13:07.559 --> 0:13:10.160 re add that one layer or undo what I did 0:13:10.280 --> 0:13:13.120 on that one layer, and now it's as if by 0:13:13.160 --> 0:13:16.360 magic we get the balloon back exactly. And and I'm 0:13:16.400 --> 0:13:17.960 sure a lot of people have noticed that you have 0:13:18.440 --> 0:13:22.280 at the top of your your application, you have different 0:13:22.320 --> 0:13:24.480 tabs on them. Is like adjustments, and you can go 0:13:24.520 --> 0:13:29.040 and you can change the contrast, the saturation, things like that. Well, 0:13:29.160 --> 0:13:32.480 with adjustment layers, you can add that on and then 0:13:32.559 --> 0:13:35.640 you can you can turn off that layer and the 0:13:35.679 --> 0:13:38.720 effect goes away. If you do that through the file 0:13:38.800 --> 0:13:43.679 menu at the top, it changes the picture permanently. If 0:13:43.720 --> 0:13:45.760 you can't, if you don't hit the back button, if 0:13:45.760 --> 0:13:48.040 you don't have undo, yeah, yeah, as long as you 0:13:48.520 --> 0:13:51.640 or or if you avoid saving it, you still have 0:13:51.679 --> 0:13:54.480 your original. But then what's the point of doing all 0:13:54.520 --> 0:13:57.200 the work? Yeah, it's a great point. I mean I've 0:13:57.200 --> 0:14:01.199 often wondered because as someone who had only casually use 0:14:01.320 --> 0:14:04.960 these editing tools myself, Uh, it took a while for 0:14:05.040 --> 0:14:08.760 me to figure out what layers were, and um, like 0:14:08.800 --> 0:14:13.000 I remember specifically using them to do things like if 0:14:13.040 --> 0:14:18.600 I wanted to take an image but remove, like remove 0:14:18.640 --> 0:14:20.880 an image on a white background, Like let's say it's 0:14:20.880 --> 0:14:23.360 a stock photo of something, and I want to put 0:14:23.440 --> 0:14:26.120 that image, the image of that thing on some other 0:14:26.160 --> 0:14:28.880 background and not have a big white box behind it. 0:14:29.560 --> 0:14:31.840 That's when it was it was useful if that was 0:14:31.880 --> 0:14:33.920 a layer itself, like I could take the layer that 0:14:34.000 --> 0:14:38.240 had the object and leave the white background behind, so 0:14:38.320 --> 0:14:40.760 I could actually put that against a different background and 0:14:40.800 --> 0:14:42.880 have it look like it meant it was meant to be. 0:14:42.960 --> 0:14:46.640 There another huge breakthrough his masks. And if use layers 0:14:46.680 --> 0:14:50.800 and masks together, you have so much control and and 0:14:51.080 --> 0:14:54.400 it's you can go backwards or forwards as much as 0:14:54.440 --> 0:14:57.400 you want in your document. With with masks, you can 0:14:58.360 --> 0:15:01.320 select a certain part of the image and then you 0:15:01.360 --> 0:15:04.360 can mask out the rest of it, so you just 0:15:04.440 --> 0:15:07.520 have that that part selected, and then you can use 0:15:07.640 --> 0:15:11.120 the paint brush to paint and or paint out to 0:15:11.440 --> 0:15:13.880 kind of clean up the lines that you just selected. 0:15:14.200 --> 0:15:16.160 If you want more of that layer that you just 0:15:16.200 --> 0:15:18.320 blank part of it out, you can you can erase 0:15:18.400 --> 0:15:19.880 part of it and you can bring it back in. 0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:25.520 So layers and mass I think we're big game changers 0:15:25.640 --> 0:15:29.720 for photo editors and photo manipulators who either used as 0:15:29.760 --> 0:15:32.360 an art or they used it to deceive whatever you 0:15:32.400 --> 0:15:35.320 want to use it for. Photoshop was making it possible. 0:15:36.360 --> 0:15:39.640 As we as we have said many times on tech stuff, 0:15:39.680 --> 0:15:44.520 it's not the tool that's necessarily the issue or the problem. 0:15:44.640 --> 0:15:47.680 It's the way the tools implemented. And the purpose of 0:15:47.720 --> 0:15:50.880 these tools was to give greater freedom to people who 0:15:50.880 --> 0:15:54.600 work in images, and what you do with that freedom 0:15:54.760 --> 0:15:57.520 is up to the choice of the individual, and in 0:15:57.560 --> 0:16:00.320 some cases it was to make art. In some cases 0:16:00.360 --> 0:16:02.160 it was just to clean up an image so that 0:16:02.600 --> 0:16:05.960 the point that the photographer wanted you to focus on 0:16:06.120 --> 0:16:09.360 was in fact the most notable element of that image. 0:16:09.680 --> 0:16:12.200 Like if if I'm taking a photo of something and 0:16:12.240 --> 0:16:15.640 I think like, oh, it's this great background and I've 0:16:15.680 --> 0:16:18.600 got a wonderful subject in the foreground, and I'm really 0:16:18.640 --> 0:16:21.200 concentrating on my subject, and I don't notice that there's 0:16:21.240 --> 0:16:25.960 some jackass twenty feet back who's you know, waving maniacally 0:16:26.000 --> 0:16:28.200 into the camera. And then I think, I really don't 0:16:28.680 --> 0:16:32.600 want that guy there. I mean, you know, just pop 0:16:32.680 --> 0:16:35.200 open a new layer and photo shop and clone stamp 0:16:35.240 --> 0:16:39.400 them out. I like the way you think, Well, when 0:16:39.400 --> 0:16:41.120 you see that guy in the street, like I clone 0:16:41.120 --> 0:16:43.920 stamped you exactly, and he doesn't know what you mean, 0:16:44.080 --> 0:16:47.200 maybe there's a good chance he has no idea how 0:16:47.400 --> 0:16:52.040 what what a sick burn, which is essentially saying, like 0:16:52.320 --> 0:16:54.560 I did what I did to you what Stalin did 0:16:54.560 --> 0:16:59.120 to the commissar, only in the photo sense, though you're 0:16:59.160 --> 0:17:03.680 free to go. So some other instances of photo manipulation, 0:17:03.800 --> 0:17:07.479 some of which were not necessarily meant to be uh 0:17:07.520 --> 0:17:11.240 taken as a representation of the actual person, some of 0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:16.840 which it's arguable. Texas Monthly Magazine had a great image 0:17:17.119 --> 0:17:20.679 of Governor Ann richards on a Harley Davidson. That's a 0:17:20.720 --> 0:17:24.320 great one, and she liked it. Yeah, yeah, she looked great. 0:17:24.680 --> 0:17:26.600 But if you actually looked in the credit page of 0:17:26.600 --> 0:17:31.040 the magazine. They they indicate that the motorcyclist was a 0:17:31.040 --> 0:17:34.240 stock image, and so if you were to take the 0:17:34.240 --> 0:17:36.800 trouble of looking at the at that credit page, you 0:17:36.840 --> 0:17:40.119 would see that they don't hide the fact that this 0:17:40.160 --> 0:17:43.879 was a manipulation. And that's almost become common practices for 0:17:44.520 --> 0:17:49.560 manipulated covers. Maybe if it's someone's head on someone else's body, yeah, 0:17:49.560 --> 0:17:51.960 which is a big thing, that it will have a 0:17:51.960 --> 0:17:54.880 small disclaimer either on the credit page or very small 0:17:55.000 --> 0:17:57.840 on the bottom of the cover that says that it 0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:02.960 is illustration. Yeah. Yeah. And ninety three that's when photoshop 0:18:02.960 --> 0:18:06.120 would come to Windows. So finally Windows users were able 0:18:06.160 --> 0:18:09.440 to stand side by side with Mac users with sixteen 0:18:09.440 --> 0:18:12.240 bit support. That was that was the big thing that year, 0:18:12.320 --> 0:18:18.280 I think for Windows. UH. Here's a famous instance of 0:18:19.119 --> 0:18:24.040 photo manipulation that was a big controversy. This was during 0:18:24.320 --> 0:18:26.679 UH just in the in the wake of O. J. 0:18:26.760 --> 0:18:30.280 Simpson being arrested on the charge of murder, and two 0:18:30.320 --> 0:18:34.000 magazines came out at the same time, both using O. J. 0:18:34.119 --> 0:18:39.400 Simpsons mug shot. Newsweek had the unaltered mug shot as 0:18:39.440 --> 0:18:44.280 the cover. Time magazine had a altered version of that 0:18:44.359 --> 0:18:49.480 mug shot. Yes, they manipulated it to make him appear 0:18:49.640 --> 0:18:55.160 darker and more menacing, which is I would argue bad 0:18:55.160 --> 0:19:02.480 photo journalism. Yeah, and uh, yes, it's yes, both of 0:19:02.520 --> 0:19:07.679 those things. It is I would argue indefensible. Yeah, that 0:19:07.760 --> 0:19:09.840 was one of the things that they show you a 0:19:09.920 --> 0:19:15.080 most photography history of photography classes or yeahtha quite pointing 0:19:15.080 --> 0:19:19.320 at that and saying, do not be this person. No, 0:19:19.480 --> 0:19:23.800 it's a bad idea. It says a lot. It says 0:19:23.800 --> 0:19:27.439 a lot of really ugly things about not just the 0:19:27.480 --> 0:19:32.080 mentality of uh, the editors of the magazine at the time, 0:19:32.119 --> 0:19:36.480 but also their opinion of the American public and perhaps 0:19:36.560 --> 0:19:41.840 even by extension, the overall dominant opinions of the American public. 0:19:41.920 --> 0:19:44.000 Like all of that none of that comes out well 0:19:44.320 --> 0:19:46.840 in that in that instance, to say that this would 0:19:46.880 --> 0:19:50.399 be seen as a reasonable use of photo editing and 0:19:50.440 --> 0:19:53.720 that it would be accepted and that, you know, that's 0:19:53.800 --> 0:19:56.800 all of that is just ugly and it's unfortunate. Yeah, 0:19:56.880 --> 0:20:00.840 and it's it's it's good that Newsweek ran the same picture, 0:20:01.320 --> 0:20:04.560 which is something that I think is is uniquely pre 0:20:05.040 --> 0:20:10.040 internet kind of saturation, is that that would happen every 0:20:10.040 --> 0:20:12.640 once in a while that Newsweek or Time would run 0:20:12.640 --> 0:20:15.680 the same image on their home on their front almost 0:20:15.680 --> 0:20:19.520 that homepage. Yeah, well, the same image of that world. 0:20:19.119 --> 0:20:22.320 I will often end up referring to old media with 0:20:22.400 --> 0:20:25.239 new media terms. And then I realized, like, I've been 0:20:25.280 --> 0:20:27.560 in this business a while now, and this is this 0:20:27.640 --> 0:20:31.160 is reality. Now. That's so weird. I remember before there 0:20:31.200 --> 0:20:35.119 was a worldwide web, um showing my age. All right, 0:20:35.200 --> 0:20:37.720 And I've got one more specific one I want to 0:20:37.720 --> 0:20:40.560 talk about, and I'm sure you have some more examples too, 0:20:40.600 --> 0:20:42.600 But the one that I was thinking of immediately that 0:20:42.880 --> 0:20:45.360 it kind of ties in in a way, and that 0:20:45.520 --> 0:20:49.720 has to do with race. Um. So the Time image 0:20:49.800 --> 0:20:55.360 was racist image. That was, like, again, just terrible photojournalism. 0:20:55.400 --> 0:20:58.159 The one I was going to mention was an attempt 0:20:58.840 --> 0:21:02.600 but the University of Wasson to demonstrate that they had 0:21:02.640 --> 0:21:08.719 a diverse student uh population by showing a group of 0:21:08.760 --> 0:21:12.120 football fans at a game that included a black student 0:21:12.440 --> 0:21:14.520 in the middle of or to the side of several 0:21:14.520 --> 0:21:17.399 white students all cheering on a football game. The only 0:21:17.440 --> 0:21:21.879 problem was it was a composite photo. The black students 0:21:21.920 --> 0:21:25.200 photo had been taken a year apart from the football 0:21:25.240 --> 0:21:27.760 fans photo, and then the black student had been inserted 0:21:27.800 --> 0:21:32.320 into the picture in order to perpetuate this idea that 0:21:32.400 --> 0:21:36.200 the University of Wisconsin had a diverse student body. Yes, 0:21:36.320 --> 0:21:39.280 and it is bad. I mean, like the photoshop itself 0:21:39.359 --> 0:21:41.600 is bad. It does not look like that person is 0:21:41.640 --> 0:21:44.439 not the same place. There's a publication in Toronto. I 0:21:44.480 --> 0:21:49.719 think it was for uh. It was like come to 0:21:49.720 --> 0:21:52.359 Toronto and they were trying to show on the on 0:21:52.440 --> 0:21:54.600 the cover a diverse family, and so they did the 0:21:54.640 --> 0:21:57.280 same thing that they did with the Wisconsin cover. And 0:21:57.320 --> 0:22:00.240 it hits me on two levels both of these covers 0:22:00.280 --> 0:22:05.000 that it's it's it's it's it's not good practice. And 0:22:05.760 --> 0:22:09.240 it wouldn't have been with all the effort and time 0:22:09.240 --> 0:22:11.720 that you went through to get those photographs, you could 0:22:11.760 --> 0:22:15.720 have gotten an actual photograph number one that would have 0:22:15.760 --> 0:22:18.680 probably been less time consuming just to get a group 0:22:18.720 --> 0:22:21.240 of people together and say hey, let's let's take your picture. 0:22:21.280 --> 0:22:23.280 We're gonna pose you here, and if there's a game 0:22:23.359 --> 0:22:25.400 and we don't take a picture. So it's not very ethical, 0:22:25.520 --> 0:22:28.800 it's not very well done, and I can good taste. 0:22:28.840 --> 0:22:32.479 And then also like the editing is really bad. You 0:22:32.520 --> 0:22:35.160 look at it and you know, yeah, I mean even 0:22:35.200 --> 0:22:37.919 with an untrained eye, it definitely does not look like 0:22:37.960 --> 0:22:40.080 these photos were taken on the same day because they weren't. 0:22:40.119 --> 0:22:42.439 They were taking a year apart. And uh, you know 0:22:42.680 --> 0:22:44.920 the University of Wisconsin, what they said was they said, 0:22:46.000 --> 0:22:49.320 we do have black students in our student body. We 0:22:49.400 --> 0:22:54.160 didn't have any photos that represented the diversity, so we 0:22:54.680 --> 0:22:58.080 made one. Yeah, and and not takeet on this sad box. 0:22:58.160 --> 0:23:02.040 But if you want diversity, do it. Yeah, Like, like, 0:23:02.280 --> 0:23:05.840 don't create the illusion of it by manipulation of photographs, 0:23:05.600 --> 0:23:08.840 but put the effort in to u get the photograph, 0:23:08.880 --> 0:23:11.359 the real photograph, get the real diversity of the campus, 0:23:11.359 --> 0:23:16.880 things like that. Yeah, I agree, it's because because all 0:23:16.920 --> 0:23:19.320 it takes, even if you do it really really well 0:23:19.400 --> 0:23:22.880 with the photo manipulation, all it takes is someone who 0:23:23.160 --> 0:23:26.080 has any knowledge of what's going on to say, yeah, 0:23:26.119 --> 0:23:29.920 it didn't really happen, and then everything unravels and then 0:23:29.960 --> 0:23:33.680 you have a pr problem that's way bigger than the 0:23:33.760 --> 0:23:39.399 perceived lack of diversity. Um, so definitely agree, address the 0:23:39.480 --> 0:23:43.800 underlying problem of diversity before you start worrying about uh, 0:23:43.840 --> 0:23:46.600 you know, the brochure as you're handing out. That's that's 0:23:46.680 --> 0:23:51.080 definitely I'm on the same page. Yeah, and and I've 0:23:51.160 --> 0:23:53.240 all of a sudden thought of like, um. There are 0:23:53.240 --> 0:23:56.560 a lot of examples of of people who have pointed 0:23:56.600 --> 0:24:00.359 out photos in this this post digital era, who have 0:24:01.080 --> 0:24:05.440 experience with photoshop, who work with digital photography fairly extensively, 0:24:06.240 --> 0:24:10.400