New Photojournalism Technique?

[mawnansmiff]

I've noticed in recent months when viewing the front pages of newspapers online that there is a photo manipulation technique that seems to be growing at a fair pace.

Typically the image is a photo of someone in dire distress with a background of destruction, but whereas the person/persons in distress are in colour, the background is all grey as if in black & white photography.

Clearly this technique is being used to put an emphasis on the people in the image but to me it just looks totally false, which I suppose it is.

Is there a name given to this kind of manipulation and how long has it been going on for?

I won't post an image but I'm sure you all know the sort of pictures I'm talking about.

Jay.

 

[pappymac]

Don't know if there is a specific name for it but I remember learning how to do that when I switched from film photography to digital back in the 1990s.

We always called it "photoshopping."

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I've noticed in recent months when viewing the front pages of newspapers online that there is a photo manipulation technique that seems to be growing at a fair pace.

Typically the image is a photo of someone in dire distress with a background of destruction, but whereas the person/persons in distress are in colour, the background is all grey as if in black & white photography.

Clearly this technique is being used to put an emphasis on the people in the image but to me it just looks totally false, which I suppose it is.

Is there a name given to this kind of manipulation and how long has it been going on for?

I won't post an image but I'm sure you all know the sort of pictures I'm talking about.

Jay.

I can think of two related techniques. Propaganda, and Manufacturing Consent.

 

[LotusEater]

I think it’s just called selective colorization buy maybe there is a better term.

 

[Sigmund]

I call it clickbait

 

[proteus]

The term could be fake news? AI? I don't believe anything I hear and used to be only half of what I see now it's more like 3/4. Hell I could be computer generated and no one would know. max headroom!

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Could you post an example of what you mean?

 

[mawnansmiff]

Could you post an example of what you mean?

Best I don't but suffice to say the subject is the current events in the Middle East.

Though I have no doubt the images themselves are real enough, it just (to me at least) lessens the integrity of the picture because I know I'm looking at a doctored image.

Likely as not it's meant to draw the viewers eye to the human element of the image though that would happen anyway without manipulation so why do it?

Jay.

 

[ThermionicScott]

I think it’s just called selective colorization buy maybe there is a better term.

Yeah, the technique been around forever, perhaps the news media are just using it more. I remember it was used to devastating effect in “Schindler’s List.”

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Though I have no doubt the images themselves are real enough, it just (to me at least) lessens the integrity of the picture because I know I'm looking at a doctored image.

That would depend on where the photo is and how it is meant to be used. If we are talking about a cover, or illustration for the article, it doesn't matter. If it is used within the body of the article, then it does lose integrity. This is why I wanted to see it.

 

[Briar Lee]

My grandmother went to her grave convinced FDR somehow was completely responsible for Pearl Harbor and not the Japanese.

But why America was for China and not Japan more than any other one reason was this masterful piece of real, actual true life propaganda taken a minute after the Japanese bombed a Shanghai railroad station in 1937 and killed this baby’s mother:

View attachment 255754

The Japanese claimed the photo was staged, but it was just luck, a Leica, and being exactly in the right place at the right time.

The crying baby is in sharp focus which “pops” the baby from the soft focus railway station devastation.

Today an editor might use digital “cross processing” to leave the baby colorized and mute or monotone the background.

The idea is to pull at your heartstrings.

Every wanna be news reporter wants to take the next “Shanghai Baby” photo.

 

[El Capitán]

It might be a form of sensationalism to accentuate the devastation.

 

[ThermionicScott]

And Civil War photographers were not above dragging a few bodies around to make a battle scene look worse, so there aren’t any new conspiracies here.

 

[mawnansmiff]

dragging a few bodies around to make a battle scene look worse

That is not happening here, it's just someone tampering with the original unstaged image with the sole purpose of emphasising something that in my opinion does not need emphasizing.....the image speaks for itself without any manipulation needed.

It would seem this is nothing new to some folk here, but it is to me.

Jay.

 

[ThermionicScott]

Converting part of an image to B&W is a pretty simple operation. There’s loads of other subtle “tampering” going on with pictures with filters and focus effects that are just doing a better job of flying under our radars.

I suspect you’ll start seeing this “selective colorization” everywhere now that you’re aware of it!

 

[Winnipeger]

Is there a name given to this kind of manipulation and how long has it been going on for?

 

[warren]

I remember Time magazine manipulated a shadowy cross in the cover picture of R. Kennedy dead on the floor in LA back in 68.

Lenses distort perspective in almost every shot. Knowing the effect and using such to improve your shot is vital for a photography. "Burning" in a cross for a news story? Outrageous! Manipulating an image for impact in a scenic? If Ansel does it, it's considered art. All in the eye of beholders and ... the editor when it comes messaging in the news.

 

[mawnansmiff]

Manipulating an image for impact

Glad you chimed in Warren.

These techniques might well have been used before, it's just that I've only been seeing them relatively recently and they just struck me as being so very stark, especially so when splashed all over the front page of a newspaper.

Clearly some picture editors don't feel there is enough horror or 'shock value' in the untouched image so use these methods to amplify things which I find a bit sad really.

Jay.

 

[Waning Embers]

"Spot Color" is a technique that removes all color and individual objects or colors can be manipulated. It's a stock tool on my 7 year old phone.

 

[warren]

Today's simple to operate software allow anyone to manipulate pictures. So, expect more of the same, more frequently. Honest shots will soon be rare. And, the motivation to falsify shots is a varied as the product. Some try to simply improve, save a vacation picture. Others are trying to sell a "statement." Product photography is an area where the manipulation begins even before the shutter is triggered. Food is hand painted, oiled or otherwise manipulated. Models are airbrushed to remove wrinkles and such. Photos and now video do indeed "lie." Often, very often! One should never believe one's eyes when viewing product shots or, even movies now days.

Often, when one sees a highly manipulated scenic that's been over cooked it is obviously faked. But, a skilled manipulation can now fool even the most discerning eye.