Blog Prompts

Good morning!

Please read the linked article here

  • After reading the article, what is your opinion on selective cropping?  Do you agree that photographers should show the entire image or is cropping the image– selecting what is shown a legitimate form of expression?  Why, why not?  Is there a difference between magazine editors cropping the image in Photoshop after taking the image as opposed to the photographer cropping out part of a scene by zooming in or getting closer to the subject?
  • To avoid spelling errors, please type your response in word and read before posting your two finely crafted paragraphs.  Your response is to be posted on the foothillart blog as well as the original New York Time blog the article is based on.

Please read some of the written responses and see if you agree or disagree with some of the positions the readers have with the article.

Example: “No different than the photo lies of Stalin, Hitler and Mao who cut people out of pictures and otherwise adjusted them to suit their ideological positions and changes. There are many ways to lie, distort and misdirect, and Newsweek is using them – proving how untrustworthy they are.”

Reminder: Name Project is due Thursday for period 1 and Friday for Period 2.



  1. Megan Pratt

    I think that cropping an image can really do damage. Photos shouldn’t be cropped unless it is only the edges. Most of the photo should be shown. The photographer took that picture to be shown. Cropping it is ruining the photo and can make a photographer look bad. If the other things in the picture weren’t important, then the photographer wouldn’t have taken the picture that way.

    If the photographer zooms in and a crop out parts of the scene, then that’s the way it’s supposed to be, but cropping out parts of a scene on Photoshop is a completely different thing. Photoshop can take a picture and make it completely different. It can make a photo no longer be the photographer’s. A photograph is a work of art and it should remain the way the artist wanted it to look.

  2. Yasmin Rivas

    I think that a photogropher should be able to crop and edited their photos any way that they want. If the photogropher has a picture that they took, and someone esle took that image and startedto edit it and crop it’, then I dont think that’s ok. You have to have the owners permission first. I think that a picture should be cropped or edited if it really needs too.

  3. Tejal Swami

    Photographers have the ability to edit photos in many different ways, but it doesn’t mean that they edit it in a way that it brings disturbance other to people. I think that it wasn’t the right thing to do for the photographer to crop and edit the picture of the vice president cutting meat. It is photo fakery so there is not point in making images that are no real and are not the right thing to do.

    How? Photoshop is the answer. Photoshop lets you to crop and edit pictures to make them in a new form, but it should be made in a way where people actually like it and dont get offended by it.

  4. Natalie Karbum and Lauren Cacatian

    Cropping leads to misinterpretation and in this case; the cropping was used as an untrue political statement and was taken too far. I think that selective cropping is okay as long as it is used for minor changes that don’t affect the story behind the picture. In this case the Photoshop was used to crop out the rest of the picture showing the entire family. Instead they used just Dick Cheney chopping up bloody meat with a knife, which could have been used to make people think something else than what the photo was intended for. We believe Photoshop and cropping is a good tool to use to touch up and to use to highlight the main purpose of your photo.

    Yes. There is a difference between magazine editors that crop out certain parts of a photo and photographers that use Photoshop because the photographers are using what they see through their eyes and the magazine editors will use what they want you to see to sell.

  5. Emily Coe

    I agree with Mr. Kennerly. Newsweek should not have cropped it and turned his picture into something it’s not. I feel bad for Mr. Kennerly because now people may look at him as the bad guy when it is really Newsweek who cropped the photo and made it into some political cartoon. Newsweek not only humiliated Dick Cheney, it made Mr. Kennerly look less professional.
    Also, Newsweek didn’t try to post the truth which is what they are supposed to do. Instead, they used the photo to help their company. They shouldn’t be so selfish in the process. This behavior seems more like paparazzi-style than a news company so it’s pretty surprising!

  6. Devyn Webber and Vanessa Lopez

    Our opinion on selective cropping is that it is acceptable in certain situations. We agree that photographers should show the entire image when necessary, but cropping the image to select what is shown is also a legitimate form of expression. It is admissible to crop a certain photograph for your purposes, for example to cut out unimportant people and or scenery, but if it is only to make the situation seem more favorable to your opinion, then that should not be allowed.

    There is a difference between magazine editors cropping the image in Photoshop after taking the image as opposed to the photographer cropping out part of a scene by zooming in or getting closer to the subject, because if they zoom in or get close, the picture they take is the truth. But if they edit it in Photoshop, then there is always an original to go back to if ever there was controversy over the image. Nevertheless, both tools are used for a similar outcome; to capture the moment for their own purpose.

  7. Tori Okada

    In my opinion, cropping an image isn’t bad if your trying to only see one part of it and you’re the person who took the picture, but if your not the person who took the picture then I don’t think you should alter a picture to an the extent that it was on the cover of Newsweek. That just leads to people wondering if all the photos that were used were real or not. Hmm…And I think its different if the photographer zooms in on his/her camera then if someone goes into Photoshop and cropping and otherwise altering the image from the original.

    And to me, I think cropping an image is a legitimate form of expression because it shows what the editor thinks of the picture, even if it offends some people and disregards the person (if it is a picture of a person) and/or object that is in the photograph. Though if the photographer edits the picture then its fine, it is after all, his/her picture to do with what they wish.

  8. Jeremy Milligan

    I think that you can crop out pictures for editorial purposes as long as you explain what was cropped out and what was cropped out in the caption. People just taking what they want out of a photo can make people think the metaphor is what’s true. That is not the purpose of the photo being cropped. If the photo were to be in its original form, then no one would get the point of the metaphor or think that the family waiting to eat, would be eating the C.I.A. They would think this because they believed that Cheney killed someone and that something sinister when this would actually be all over television not only some magazine.

  9. Joesphe Igo

    My opinion on selective cropping is that its all right unless you change the original photo to prove something thats a lie and fabricated. I also believe that Mr. Kennerrlyn is right to fell bad about this whole situation. It is embarresing that so many photographers have to prove that they are trustworthy to have their photos believed, because of cropping.

    People should definently get their facts strait before the automatically assume a photo o the internet is real or not. In the future this problem could definently raise. All and all this is gonna be a major issue in the future because photographer will have to prove their trust.

  10. Lauren Amendola

    I think that that the editors should not have cropped the image like that to make him look bad. Selective cropping can be a useful tool, but also a bad tool. It’s not right to crop an image to make it look a different way in that sense. If it were just to crop out an extra part in the picture, it would be ok, but it’s not when you make it have an unreal meaning.

    If you crop it to make an unreal meaning and the photographer and the people in the picture say its ok than it is ok, but if it’s behind their back then it’s not ok. There is a big difference between magazine editors cropping the image in Photoshop after taking the image as opposed to the photographer cropping out part of a scene by zooming in or getting closer to the subject because it is not changing the meaning of the picture. Cropping that picture was not right.

  11. Gabby Trainor

    After reading the article and many responses I think I most agree with the photographer. There is a huge difference between cropping a photo in Photoshop and cropping a photo by zooming or getting closer to the subject. The photographer makes artistic choices based on what they see or feel in the moment of taking the picture, cropping that artistic moment is changing the whole feel to their picture. Although changing the feel could be what the photographer is going for, so in that case I would agree with the photographer cropping their own photograph. Selecting what is shown in the photo is a legitimate form of expression because you are trying to portray a certain message.

    Having said all that, I do not think that magazine editors have the right to crop an image without the consent and artistic view of the photographer. In David Kennerly’s case he is right, Newsweek did not have the right to crop the image if Kennerly felt that strongly about cropping. When a magazine is using an image they need to respect the artist who took the photo and work with them to get what they really need out of the photo. Photographers, like all artists put themselves into the art that they are sharing with the world and changing the art is not right and should not be done.

  12. Megan Lenington

    After viewing the two photos of our former vice president I must say the alterations, in my mind, made no negative effect. The cropping of this picture simply made it cleaner, and took out much of the surrounding clutter, really focusing on the main point, the man slicing his dinner. At first glance I never suspected any tacit hints at this man being a blood thirsty butcher. It would take a disturbed mind to find this in anyway morbid, and even more of a creative eye to be offended by the changes made. Being a photojournalist, the photographer knew that the editor has artistic license and can adjust as he or she see’s necessary, and therefore has no right to complain.

    Although it is slightly offensive to have your art changed from its original state, it is part of the business. The photographer would feel remorse for not having his or her full vision up on the banner, but that is hardly grounds to get the public involved. Slight cropping to bring in a focal point is not out of context, or changing the meaning of the picture, it is simply another persons point of view, and should be respected as such.

  13. Tre Barber

    I think that selective cropping for the most part is wrong. But if it’s your pictures and you crop them you should be able to do what you want with them.
    The situation with Dick Cheney’s picture that was cropped it seems wrong to selectively crop photos. It can make photos look bad and make it out to be something its not. It makes it wrong because they sort of made the picture out to something other than what it was to make him look bad. However if the photographer wants to crop their pictures it’s their right to do so.
    At the end of the day people have the freedom to do what they want. If they feel like they want to crop their pictures they can do so. I think it’s ultimately up to the editors to crop it in a negative or positive way. There is a difference between photographers cropping photos and magazine editors cropping photos. The photographer can do whatever he or she wants. But editors are usually the ones who make the decision of how they want them too look. I think editors should really just edit the photos in a positive way.

  14. Morgen Peterson

    I do not agree with selective cropping whatsoever. The photographer is the only person who should be allowed to crop his or her own photo. I think this because it is their piece of art, it’s their property. Nobody should be able crop other people’s work because in some cases it can change the whole affect of the picture so it’s basically making a new picture and posting it.

    It would be similar to an artist sending in their painting to an art show and then having the people take a paint brush, fixing the painting to what they think looks better. Another example would be plagiarizing part of someone else’s essay. It’s not other people’s property so they shouldn’t use it for their own good to put in their paper for school or work. I definitely think that selective cropping is wrong and no photographer should let anyone get away with cropping their photos.

  15. Adam Braver

    Cropping is an amazing tool. But with any amazing tool also come its pros and cons. In the case of this article, cropping has no doubt been shown to be a con.
    No matter how corrupt Dick Cheney may be as a politician, he is still a human being. The original photo simply showed him preparing a meal for his family. When the original photographer captured that image, he meant no harm.

    Yet as the media seems to love to do now at days with many pictures and articles, a magazine editor took that innocent image and cropped it to make it look like Cheney is a ruthless beast with no heart whatsoever. That is an absolutely disgusting and vile act to commit. Now I am not saying that I am a great supporter of Cheney and his ways. It is the fact that the magazine editor took the photo and cropped it for his or her own personal gains that that makes me detest this whole act in the first place. It is completely wrong and should not be tolerated.

  16. Memo Mederos

    When someone photo crops a picture that person should make sure he/she is doing it well and correctly without trying to start a scandal. I believe that when a photo is cropped it is no longer the same photo, yet a different photo from the previous one taken. When both are revealed they should compare without many differences. If there is too much of a difference then the photos are different and not the same.

    When a magazine cuts out parts of a photo it is usually for publicity. The whole photo itself isn’t worth much but once something is cut out or something in particular is picked it can lead to a scandal making the magazine sell and sell. If there is a picture of a couple of friends going out for dinner then someone could just remove all of them except for two and make it look as if only those two went out on a date instead of all of them. Photo cropping should be honest and not a lie.

  17. Jackie Duncan

    After reading the article, I can see why the photographer would be disappointed and feel that it was misused in this case. In my opinion, cropping an image by zooming or in Photoshop is the photographer’s choice and they should not be punished for it because it is their vision. I think it would become a problem when the photographer’s vision changes due to an editors’ cropping. Selective cropping defiantly has its place in some situations, but I feel it is up to the photographer, so the message doesn’t become distorted.

    I can see where cropping an image could be a form of expression to some people, including editors, but I think when it changes the meaning of the picture, it is distorting someone else’s form of expression, which is wrong. As for the picture of Cheney in Newsweek, I don’t think it did any noticeable harm by cropping the picture, but it made the photographer feel that his work was being made into a joke, by poking fun at the former vice president.

  18. Lizet Ruvalcaba

    True photographers are those who capture images of true events. They do not need to edit them to make the photos better. I believe that Mr. Kennerly is a true photographer. It is obvious that he will feel mad that others take his work and messing with it, sending it to the public. I would feel the same way. It is a very good thing that he made this blog to show people, especially those that crop pictures and turn them into ugly misleading trash.

    I am currently a student in a photography class. I love taking photos and it takes a while to get that one perfect piece of photo art. Therefore, if I saw that anyone took my hard work and played around with it, making it something that was the opposite of what it was suppose to be, then I would be humiliated and embarrassed like Kennerly felt because it was my photo, except transformed.

    There is one sad truth that photographers are going to need to face. That their work will be used, it is how it should be but people out there do not know how to be creative and do their own “master piece.”

  19. Amelia Gomez

    I think there are two sides to the arguement that image cropping . One side of the arguement is that photo cropping is bad and can totally twist the idea of an image. It can lead to wrongful propaganda. For instance, It can show, like with the Dick Cheney photo. The cropped version showed simply a man cutting up his dinner. But the full photo revealed a family. Hiw wife and company getting ready to enjoy a nice dinner.

    But photo cropping can also be used for good. It can edit an unflattering picture into a nice presentable one. Photo cropping can help people with self esteem issues. It can also change your perception on a person or situation.

  20. Kayla Laguna

    The usage of photo cropping is just taking advantage of photography in general. It is a tool that can be used for wrong doing and should be respected. The photographer should not render photos over to a reporter willing to alter them for their own selfishness. If a photographer legitimately catches someone in an awkward possibly bad position then fine, it seems acceptable to use the image. However, if it must be cropped to suit the biased perspective of the journalist then frankly they have no real proof or evidence to back up false claims.

    Photo cropping can be used for good but either way that would be false too. If this technique should be used at all, then the reader/viewer of the images should be informed because then it comes down to honesty. If honesty is played with then the journalist will easily lose credibility and trust. After all America itself puts trust in journalists and newspapers so why should they be allowed to modify the truth? There’s a fine line between editing and photo cropping… which is clearly being crossed.

    Well that is just downright shameful!

  21. Maddie Keyes-Levine

    I believe that the usage of photo cropping is no worse than a photographer zooming in on a subject while taking the picture. Photo cropping can be used to focus in on a subject just like zooming can. Besides this picture of Dick Cheney hardly looks ‘evil’ or ‘sinister’, I did not think anything of the sort, but rather that he is just eating.

    I do not think that the cropping in this case was the issue; however the added biased headlines were misleading. On the other hand there are two sides; both zooming and photo cropping can be used to make pictures look better or worse than they actually are. I think that people need to be smart and not believe every picture they see, because it could easily be misconstrued with today’s technologies. People need to think about what else could be in the picture, but magazines that claim to be unbiased should make sure that the real image is also seen.

  22. Aysen Tan

    Although I can understand Mr. Kennerly’s feeling of artistic robbery, cropping and image editing is so widely used today, that it becomes acceptable and convenient. Newsweek’s crop of Mr. Kennerly’s image does degrade his photo quality and reputation, but most news magazines, including Newsweek, would rather have its readers get the news in quick, succinct snapshots instead of the artistic, thoughtful photographs photojournalists can achieve. Furthermore, Newsweek paid Mr. Kennerly for rights publish the photo as well as crop.

    That being said, Newsweek’s conceited and bigheaded reply taints the magazine’s already infamous reputation by showing its bias views as well as their indifferent feelings for their photographers. “Did we use the image to make an editorial point — in this case, about the former vice president’s red-blooded, steak-eating, full-throated defense of his views and values? Yes, we did.” As quoted from Frank J. De Maria’s response, the vice president for Newsweek’s corporate communications. This retort is utterly disgraceful and unnecessary. I wouldn’t be surprised if Newsweek half of its subscribers because of this.

  23. Lindsay Boyd

    After reading the article my opinion on selective cropping is that, although it can do damage, I feel it is okay to do so to express a certain statement. The way I see it, selective cropping isn’t any different that drawing a portrait or picture to illustrate your point. Take for example Time magazine; they have a drawn picture on the front cover to illustrate their headlining story. And this story isn’t always showing someone in a nice light, which means the picture that was drawn usually won’t be portraying the person in a nice way.
    Now we can all look at these drawings and see that they are in fact drawings, but that doesn’t change my original point of the fact that it’s more or less doing the exact same thing selective cropping is doing, illustrating a point. A good practice that I believe the journalist that do this selective cropping should get into is providing a link online to the original image in their article so we can see the full picture.

  24. Lucas Holifield

    I think that, although cropping the picture was in poor taste and a bit misleading, overall Newsweek did nothing wrong. They did not alter the picture in any way other than removing portions of it; they did not change what was happening in the photo at all. Dick Cheney was indeed cutting steak, and they portrayed him doing this, nothing more. I understand Mr. Kennerly’s point, but he is overreacting a bit. Yes, he may not agree with how his photo portrayed the former Vice President, but legally Newsweek can use the photograph and since the subject matter was not changed drastically, Newsweek has done nothing wrong.
    Cropping is an extremely common practice in photography used to edit out the uninteresting or unnecessary parts of a photograph, and in this instance, Mr. Cheney’s family may have given the picture a different “feel”, but they were not necessary to convey what was happening in the moment the picture was taken: Dick Cheney was cutting meat. That is what happened, and that is what is shown in the picture; that is why I believe that Newsweek is in the clear.

  25. Brandon Shara

    I think that what they did to the picture was kind of stupid. I mean why did they change it to just make a stupid political bash against him? All he was doing was preparing a meal for his family to eat. I dont get why people have to try to use his bloody steak as a metaphor for something bad.

    In my opinion the media is stupid for doing something like this, and they shouldnt use photoshop for making false photos against people, its just stupid.

  26. Halie

    I believe that the picture was miss used, but it was miss used to make a point. Pictures are often times used to make an allusion, and the allusions that are made are not always right. That does not necessarily make it fine to make the picture to appear that way, but it is both legal and to many people acceptable.

    Cropping however is fine and normal, and they did make a good point that they just cropped out the less interesting part of the picture so the focus would be on the most interesting part.

  27. Keith Filegar

    It is a sad and unfortunate truth that the delicate art of photo-journalism is being slowly destroyed by the easily accessible photo manipulation techniques, that are being used by cheap journalists and cheap editorials. Mr. Kennerly has a great right to feel violated about his work and should make his point heard that his photos, nor anyone else’s, should ever be manipulated to make a false point by anybody whether it be one journalist or an entire magazine.

  28. Grant Sisemore

    My opinion on selective cropping is that it should not be used unless the photographer allows it, or if he zooms in or gets closer to what he is photographing. I don’t think that it is a form of expression, because it is distorting the true meaning of the whole photograph.

    I do think there is a difference between a publisher editing the photo, and the photographer zooming in on the object that they are photographing. I think this because when a publisher edits the photo on Photoshop, they change the meaning of the picture, while when the photographer simply zooms in, he is truly taking a picture that means one thing, and one thing only.

  29. Elyse De Lara

    I think it is fine to crop photos as long as it is appropriate. In this article the cropping of this photo was way off, it misrepresented the photo and scene. Mr. Kennerly was not at fault it was Newsweek who should be blamed for the way the picture was represented. Dick Cheney was also not at fault here, he was just enjoying a dinner with this family but Newsweek had to turn it into something it was not.

    There is a big difference between cropping and editing a picture to make it look better rather than editing it to hurt someone. I think it is fine to crop a picture if it is in the right context. There are some picture that have to edited and there are some that are perfectly fine the way they are.

  30. Ariana Cohen

    I feel like everyone is trying to tell their version of the truth. Mr. Kennerly wanted to show Vice. Cheney as a human serving his family a quiet dinner, Newsweek wanted to depict him as something a bit more vulgar and ruthless.
    When you’re in the art and entertainment buisness, everything is left to interpretation. Song writers can’t do anything to assure that everyone understands their lyrics, and filmmakers can’t just give away the morals of their movies. Like them, every picture you take is left to interpretation.

  31. Shannon Fitzpatrick

    I think that cropping a photo can be the right or wrong thing to do depending on the situation. For instance, if it is the photographer him or herself cropping it, in my opinion that is 100% legit. But if someone else takes a photographers work and crops it for any reason, good or bad, i’d have to say thats not right, it is that photographers work and they should have a say in what is done to it.

    Another issue is taking a picture and cropping it to make it into something completely different like the cheney picture in the artical “Chop and Crop” , no matter how many people dont like the guy, that still shouldn’t be acceptable. I actually believe that, that should be illegal. Cropping pictures has many bad factors such as, implamenting
    someone of something that is false, and making the photographer itself look bad. For that reason I myself am not a fan of cropping photos.

  32. Marisa Martinez

    Photos are taken the way they’re taken for a reason. It is the photographer’s choice if he/she does not like what is in the photo, or if something needs to be removed from it, not the media’s. Photographers have a right to their own photos and don’t deserve to have their pictures being butchered by the media because ‘the media wants it that way’. Photographers put a lot of hard work into their photos to have it come out the way they do, and to have someone else crop and edit their photo without their say so is just wrong.

    If the media wants a photo a certain way, then they should go take the photo themselves instead of taking someone else’s photo and disrespecting the photographer by cropping it. It frustrates me to see and hear about photographers whose photos have been taken from them by the media. If the photo needs to be cropped or edited in anyway, that is the photographer’s choice, nobody else’s.

  33. Ciana Iveson

    In some ways I agree with the statements that Mr. Kennerly released in that article. Also I have to disagree with some of his objectives in the article. Mr. Kennerly is a professional photographer and this particular picture was a nice family portrait. In this case it is in many senses wrong that Newsweekly cropped this picture to such an extreme. By cropping the picture the way they did gave the photo a totally different essence and feeling to what was going on in the background. It was indeed wrong of Newsweekly to do this and it should be known to be that.

    In other cases, being a professional photographer, Mr. Kennerly should have been more careful in what he photographs. He should know the truths of the press and how they will twist things to fit with what they are trying to spoon feed to the public. The press is all about publicity and when Mr. Kennerly releases a photo that could possibly be twisted to that extreme he should not be as astonished as to what the press will do to get a story. I am not saying he should have seen into the future all I am saying is he should not be as astounded as to what they did with his simple photograph.

  34. Kera Knight

    My opinion on cropping is that it can be very useful. It can be used to cut out unwanted parts of an image to make it look better or to fix it to your likings. On the other hand, i dont think that cropping should be used to blackmail someone or to make it seem like something that it isn’t. There is definately a difference between cropping to make the photo look better and cropping to set someone up.

    I think Mr. Kennerly has been taken advantage of and has the right to feel insulted. They took a photo that was an innocent dinner preparation with his family and turned it around to make it look like something it wasn’t. They tried to make him seem as if he was evil when in the real picture he was only helping out with a family dinner.

  35. Chris Myers

    I believe photographers should make it their intention to create a picture of what they want others to see. In this case, Kennerly took a picture intending to show a normal family dinner at the Cheney’s. It wasn’t edited or made bias but purely taken through the eye of the camera. Cropping or editing a picture in photoshop is meant to manipulate the picture and while that is not a crime, if a photographer did that to his own creation, he is clearly showing that he is not comfortable with it. Therefor, if one wishes to edit their picture, they should not consider themselves a photographer but a hobbyist or something of the sort.

    There is a difference between Newsweek cropping a picture and Kennerly zooming or getting closer to the subject of his picture. Newsweek intended to convey the message that Cheney was a meat slaughterer and while he is not my favorite person in the world, editing Kennerly’s photo like that is shameful. Kennerly just wanted to show a scene of Cheney having dinner with his family. Unfortunately, this is how the media works, this is what people pay for.

  36. Tina Ramirez

    In my opinion, I believe that selective cropping should only be used when there is the need to. Photographers should use the whole image they have photographed to show the whole perspective and meaning. If they show the entire image they can back up their information and take the credit that is rightfully theirs.

    Photographers should only photograph the image they need instead of cropping out what they have to use in article. If they crop out a certain part of their image it takes some of the picture’s value. When a article is important then the photographer’s image makes it that much valuable to the article. Cropping should only be used when it is necessary and/or needed.

  37. Andrew Livingston

    I don’t agree with Dick Cheney, but I don’t know why someone would take a picture and crop it to make it look like he’s doing something wrong. I think that the media focuses on the wrong things, and they should look at the more important things in the world.

  38. Valerie Abernathy

    Many people crop pictures to suit the way they want thier project to seem like, or to express a certain message. It may be a little over the top when it’s about a former Vice President, but it seems like it was to show an idea of him. Rather, the way someone thinks about or of him. And in America, citizens have the first amendment right of freedom of speech and I believe that photography can be a way of speaking. After all, they say that a picture is worth a thousand words.

    Although, sometimes it may not seem like the best thing to show and talk about but people do it everywhere. Some people just make a big deal about it because Dick Cheney is a famous political figure. But he’s just like everyone else; he’s a human being. And every human talks about another. I think it shouldn’t be that big of a deal but people make what they can out of everything they see, read, hear, and feel.

  39. Kayleigh Briggs

    I believe that you should have permission from the legal picture holder before they crop and edit a photo not of themselves. Cropping is a good tool to use but in many ways it can be used against you. A picture can go from good, to twisted and distorted beyond recognition.

    I also think that a photo in a magazine and/or in an article should remain unedited or cropped. Zooming in on someone’s face is completely different. If you were to zoom in on an original picture it would show, in more detail, the picture as a whole. If you were to crop and distort the image it can be hurtful to the person and/or people in that particular photo.

  40. Xochilth Arias

    I agree with David Kennerly, the mass media has degraded photographers everywhere. They’ll crop, enhance, and slap a headline on it. If they didn’t find the image useful in its original form, they shouldn’t have used it. The photographer didn’t intend for his subject to be slandered by the photo, but that is what happened. It not only makes the photographer look bad, but because of the fact that we now know what Newsweek has done, it makes them look bad as well.
    Now that we know that they have done this, which was taking a family photo and turn it into a slanderous publication, it makes me wonder what else they have taken out of context. Misusing images, interviews, etc. It is because of things like this, that cause two thirds of Americans not to believe what they see or read in the media.

  41. Tyler Ortmann

    In photography, cropping can be used in its pros and con ways. I feel that Newsweek’s cropping of the photo was very inappropriate and overall, killing the photo itself. Politics should not be involved in that photo in the first place. All he did was take a nice photo, and then the media influence the world by cropping it into something horrible.

    In the end, beautiful photography should not be put into a political bash of someone. It’s misleading the main purpose of the quality of the photo. In the end, Newsweek should not have Photoshop the original photo.

  42. Ashleigh Secor

    Truthfully, I can see both sides of the argument because, for one, selective cropping is not hurting anyone, in this case, yes, it was to go against Dick Cheney, but I cant see the “horror” in the picture, to me, it did look like he was just getting ready for a nice family meal. I can also see the point that David Kennerly was just trying to make.

    Yes, that was wrong of Time Magazine to use a innocent photo, and supposedly turn it into a bad thing, because it was making the photographer look like he was against Dick Cheney when in reality he wasn’t.

  43. Kylie Martinez

    Photojournalism is becoming corrupt. The digital world is becoming more advanced in editing skills. This isn’t a good thing because they can twist pictures into what they want the viewers to see and not the original piece of art. It’s also getting hard to figure out which photos are fake and which aren’t. This may start affecting people, mainly the celebrities since the paparazzi are always looking for ways to embarrass them.

    The cause of fake pictures after a while actually does start to take affect causing the reader to think what they’re reading or looking is not real. This would lead people to stop reading and buying their stuff. For the photojournalist, they make they’re living out of juicy pictures, not just boring pictures of flowers or trees, they want the good stuff, this is how the fake photos and drama start happening. It’s understandable why they do, for money of course, but sometimes they may go too far.

  44. Natalie Wongwananurat

    You can not trust what the news is telling you these days. You don’t know what the truth is and what is unreal and made up. In my opinion, selective cropping can do harm to reality and therefore should not be used unless it is for good reasons. Selective cropping can be a legitimate form of expression, or it can be used for fakery. In this picture, Mr. Cheney is shown leaning over a bloody carving board. The news uses this picture to send false information about Mr. Cheney to the public. In reality, the full picture was just of him and his family preparing for a simple dinner. This is how the news can trick you into thinking something is real when it isn’t.

    There is definitely a difference between magazine editors cropping the imagine in Photoshop, and a photographer cropping part of a scene by zooming. Magazine editors can use cropping to give false information about the picture. Photographers only zoom in or get closer to the subject for good usage, either to get rid of something they don’t want in the picture or get a better picture of their subject. It isn’t right when someone crops your pictures and use them for bad purposes. If it’s your work, no one else should have the right to mess with it. That is my opinion on selective cropping.

  45. Olivia Sanderson

    Our world has two sides to everything. Good and bad. Mr. Kennerly’s innocent photo was the victim of what bad can be. As we know his photo was the start of a “simple family dinner” and quickly turned into a biased and unfair article. Cropping, like our world can easily be good and turn bad. In my opinion cropping is not a bad thing but can be turned into a bad thing (unfortunately).

    Many publishing situations cropping is misused. In this case both the photographer and Mr. Cheney were exposed in careless ways, but even with the quotes Dick Cheney looks like a harmless man making dinner with his family. I understand that the quote changes everything but its really unfortunate that cropping was used in a crude way.

  46. Natalie Oulman

    I believe editing a picture more then just with saturation is completely acceptable. Cropping pictures is a great way to clearly get your point across. Taking away the extra edges of a picture can expertly tell someone what you had intended on taking a picture of. I do however agree with how it is unjust to take a harmless picture of a man preparing a meal for his family and turning around and making it into some sort of weapon against his image.

    Cropping out important parts in an image can be a threatening tool and can lead to serious accusations and arguements. Especially when it’s challenging a former political party member. When photo cropping is used I envision it to be used on inanimate objects or possibly a self portrait, and not on someone who has to maintain an image. All in all, I say that photo cropping should still be used, but only in certain events and times.

  47. Chris Waechter

    Susan Sontag’s criticisms toward photography are similar to David Kennerly’s in the sense that all photos are limited in their ability to project the truth. This example of photojournalism shows Dick Cheney as a “sinister, macabre, or even evil” person even though the original doesn’t represent the same message.

    It is wrong that people have the ability to alter photos, whether by photoshop, lightroom, etc., misleading the reader for the benefit of the editor’s beliefs. This misrepresentation should not be allowed because it produces a false point of view. Although seemingly harmless to someone’s reputation, the overall impact of cropping can be overwhelmingly great, and the editor in question does not seem to realize the consequences of their decision.

  48. Wil

    The cropping of this image was used to indicate ex vice president Dick Cheney negatively. Most individuals don’t realize the power and influence that photographs have over our lives.

    Cropping and editing pictures is a normal part of photography but if used incorrectly it shows bias thoughts. This picture was used to form an incorrect allusion of a simple action of preparation of a family meal.

  49. Kaia Perez

    It is not just about cropping its about showing your picturse and being able to take out things in the picture you dont want its great. they use cropping. people can also use croping for seting up a Scene.”Photojournalists fight the credibility battle every day, from combating digitally faked photos to being lumped in with the paparazzi”. croping can be a good thing and a bad thing because you can Manipulate to look the way you want . Like they did with the picture of Dick Chenney. the cropped version was to show the editorial point of view, that could only have been done by shifting the content of the image so that people reading just saw what the editors wanted them to see.

  50. Matt Zinik

    I agree with the statements made in this article. I think that it is wrong to manipulate any kind of photo in anyway to further prove an opinion or point. That is not honest journalism just the same when people print lies. This will confused reader and not give them the full and honest truth. They will go on in life confused and make mistakes possible ruining lives—all because they were misinformed by a misleading photo.
    Further more if you really need a photo depicting the right emotion and feelings you should make the effort to find it. Not crop a photo or digitally manipulate it. It would be the same thing if you planted fake evidence in a court trial. Never getting the full truth and deceiving the public. All in all, photojournalism should be an honest profession that catalogues the truth.

  51. Oscar Pratt

    This picture was taken and warped out of meaning. It was not meant to be what it currently implies and it is an unethical example to why one should not digitally edit photographs. This is no better then “Outside” magazine adding text to Lance Armstrong’s shirt in the cover photo shoot.

    People reading this will have a biased opinion on life and lead a biased life and die a biased death. This picture is actually meant to show a happy ex-president enjoying a day with his family.

  52. Alexa Sharp

    My opinion is that a good photographer should be able to take a picture and make it good without having to use Photoshop, but I have known photographers who take a picture meaning to edit it in Photoshop. This includes cropping, I have seen other photographers (and myself) use cropping to help create the image in their head. Sadly cropping has also been use to abberate pictures, this happens when someone other then the photographer crops the image to make it appear to be something it isn’t. On the other hand if the photographer is the one who is doing the cropping then it is ok because it is his/hers and he/she has copyright over the image.

    What happened to the image in the article was wrong and shouldn’t have happened. This tends to happen a lot and is something that should be fixed but most likely won’t happen because photographers can’t monitor every single person who may get a hold of the photos. The simple fact is that cropping a picture that is not yours is plagiarism and is wrong.

  53. Erika Elizalde

    Though the article has expressed much opinion in selective cropping, I believe it is the photographer’s choice. In photography, the action of cropping is to focus on a certain portion of the image in order to capture the essence they were looking for. Therefore, cropping an image is, in fact, a legitimate form of expression. The purpose of cropping is to “cut off or mask unwanted edges or areas of a negative or print.” And the photographer makes their own decision whether they’d want to focus their image on just one object or more.

    I believe there is no difference between cropping images in Photoshop as opposed to zooming in or getting closer to the object. Either way, the photographer is still cropping the image. These two purposes share the exact same action: to focus on a particular subject in an image.

  54. Lauren Parrino

    Photojournalism is tricky, there’s no arguing that. Any photo can easily misrepresent a person, place or event and, of course, at the same time words are not even needed. But to knowingly alter a photograph for the intention of supporting your own biased opinions in immoral and instead of trying to make a name for yourself and your article you imprint a mark of indecency on the entire media field.

    I, on the other hand, have no reason to say that modifying photos shouldn’t be used just for the sake of improving the quality of the photograph (although any professional photojournalist would or should rely on such tools). By all means, go ahead. Fix the photo digitally for rationale reasons but it is wrong to alter any photo for any purpose; there is no, newspaper, website, magazine, article, column or opinion company or piece that should misuse multimedia. They inform the public, not guide them down a path simply because the writer or editor feels they should.

  55. Vanessa Lopez

    Honestly I do not see the problem in cropping an image to make a point. The photographer of this image obviously wanted to make a point and he could only do so by making adjustments, just as many other photographers do. Some have said that cropping images serves as a false source of information, yet if the person really cared about the issue or because they would not solely base their knowledge on one photograph. I believe cropping a photo shows a legitimate form of expression because a photographer is just expressing their thoughts or beliefs in an image that does not mean the bystander has to agree with them.
    I do not think there is that big of a difference between magazine editors cropping an image in Photoshop after taking the image and having a photographer crop out part of a scene by zooming in or getting closer to the subject because their purpose is still the same. In both cases they are trying to focus on a point or thought.

  56. Sarah Noell

    I think that when it comes to photo cropping, or not, it depends on the situation. Personally I think that if you are going to take a picture then you should leave it as it is, especially when it comes to people. But I suppose if an image portrays someone or something that is mean or simply makes them or it look bad then they should have the liberty of changing it to a degree.
    In the case of Dick Cheney’s phony photo I think that what happened should not have. Its one thing to be on the other side of the camera and have your pictures criticized or changed, but it’s another thing to be the person in the photo and have it changed to look like something that its not. He probably thought that it was going to be a nice picture of his family sitting down for a meal, but instead it portrayed him as someone who just finished cutting meat. In a way it’s not that bad because most everyone eats meat but not everyone cuts their own meat so you could see how this is hurtful. Also he probably won’t trust that photographer again, I wouldn’t, and he most likely feels exploited because of the photographer when it’s not really their fault. So in conclusion pictures should be taken with the same intention from the beginning, or not at all.

  57. Aubree Foster

    i believe that people should have the right to edit pictures as such, but not to a point where it is affecting the person in the picture. People shouldn’t have the rights to edit someones picture so drastically in a negative way.

    I think that the news people have taking photoshoping too far and are using it to turn people against one another. However, i think that if you just want to edit your pictures you should be able to as long as you have permission by the person in the photo.

  58. Danielle Landry

    Yes, I fully agree with the fact that cropping an image is manipulating expression and failing to provide the “full picture.” By selective cropping you can change the full meaning of a picture. For example, Dick Cheney’s phony photo appears to the audience as a man carelessly slicing meat. However as we look at the original photo he is simply at a family dinner and in no such means was this to been seen through the eye in this sort of manner.
    I do not think that there is a huge difference between cropping or zooming in on an image during the actual time the picture is being taken or in photo shop later on. Either way you are the one who is showing from a bias point of view. All in all whether its taking a photo, editing a photo, or even being in a photo… the photograph as a whole should remain left untouched by bias points of view.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Visit Us On InstagramVisit Us On TwitterVisit Us On PinterestVisit Us On YoutubeCheck Our Feed