Stones thrown by boy has very limited 'range'.. :bsmilie:
I would say the tank is only abt 5~10m away. IMHO, I think DOF is ok here..
Is this doctored?
- Thread starter firestone
- Start date
- Status
Stones thrown by boy has very limited 'range'.. :bsmilie:
I would say the tank is only abt 5~10m away. IMHO, I think DOF is ok here..
Doctored or not, do you notice the tracks of the second tank?
I see perfectly defined shadows (little but consistent), the light source looks pretty consistent too. The picture does look believable to me. Nevertheless, this was a picture taken in 2002 thus these has been in circulation for a while, surely it is not doctored given the source of a known Bethlehem photographer and AFP/Getty agency.
I see perfectly defined shadows (little but consistent), the light source looks pretty consistent too. The picture does look believable to me. Nevertheless, this was a picture taken in 2002 thus these has been in circulation for a while, surely it is not doctored given the source of a known Bethlehem photographer and AFP/Getty agency.
I doubt it to be doctored. Looking back at the link given for this photo and tracking it back to the photographer he seem to be someone who is out there shooting photos of atrocities by the Isrealist towards the Palestinian.
IT looked doctored as the photoshoping was done very quickly or badly due to his/her skill. Looking at the lighting of the sun and state of the shadow. The tank would actually be pretty dark as the shadow falls forward and to the left. It is almost like shooting a backlit subject. I suspect he dodge more lighting to bring out the details of the tank but fall short of using a mask or some other means to mask down the boy's form properly when he lighten the constrast of the tank's form. So the dark bits near tight angles of the boy's body is the real shadow or shade of the tank's detail. This is almost like a HDR type touchup thingy in some way but done badly.
IT looked doctored as the photoshoping was done very quickly or badly due to his/her skill. Looking at the lighting of the sun and state of the shadow. The tank would actually be pretty dark as the shadow falls forward and to the left. It is almost like shooting a backlit subject. I suspect he dodge more lighting to bring out the details of the tank but fall short of using a mask or some other means to mask down the boy's form properly when he lighten the constrast of the tank's form. So the dark bits near tight angles of the boy's body is the real shadow or shade of the tank's detail. This is almost like a HDR type touchup thingy in some way but done badly.
I believe it's a fake... Where's the boy shadows or the shadows is not right? That's how I see it.
actually there has been a recent case of a reportage photograph doctored in the claims of removing dust particles but ended up with multiple missiles falling on cloning which is not true. since then photoediting need to be done consciously of what it depicts, and war photographers need to be especially careful of this. maybe at the time of the picture above, there is still bad practices around that is not regulated and the photographer is not fully aware of the pitfalls in photoediting.
however selective bias and doctoring of a photo may not be miles apart. if he only shoots atrocities by the Isrealist towards the Palestinian, and not the other way round, he is not being true in his profession as a reportage photographer and that would be just bad too.
Look carefully on the left. The tank has a HUGE imprint, the boy in comparision can't have exactly the same match of imprint...
Don't think it's fake.
The tank is so huge and its shadows are already so thin. If you look closely, the boy's shadow can be seen too I think, but its quite insignificant compared to the tank's shadow.
The tank is so huge and its shadows are already so thin. If you look closely, the boy's shadow can be seen too I think, but its quite insignificant compared to the tank's shadow.
it is a conflict that is a result from extremists from both sides and supported by biased populations from both sides. as long as unarmed individuals without threat is targetted deliberately and attacked unprovoked, it is atrocities. and that doesn't matter what race or what religion or what nationality one belongs to. human beings are afterall human beings, and everyone is just as likely to do good or to do bad.
this has a long history with lots of open events that is readily available for reference, with the difference or disagreement mostly left to interpretation rather than unawareness. i'm sure there is no need of you to ask this question as you can read it yourself. if what you read cannot convince you, neither could i.
regardless if the boy is added in digitally or not...
they could've just paid the boy to do the same thing...
they could've just paid the boy to do the same thing...
which is why it is important of a journalist and a reportage photographer to be professional in conduct, their aim being to cover neutrally of all parties involved in the events they come across.
however, the assumption of paying of the kid or biased selective coverage are what we cannot see. the picture is what we see, so at least we can comment more on that.
however, the assumption of paying of the kid or biased selective coverage are what we cannot see. the picture is what we see, so at least we can comment more on that.
Your answer is the why this conflict will still go on. You have to know who are the oppressors and who are the oppressed. Resistance is legitimate for any illegal occupied nation. I'm sure you know of how many U.N charters the Israelis has violated. If not I suggest you go on and read it.
my answer is it is a vicious cycle with provocation initiated from both sides as a counter-reaction to the previous assault from the other party. and yes that is the reason why the conflict will still go on, with supporters of violence.
you have to know and see things on both sides for any discussion to be viable, as invasion is bilateral. that is all i have to say from a neutral point, as i have said it is not a matter of awareness or academic interest but a matter of sociocultural background, faith and interpretation. anyway, i know it is most likely to be fixated, so i won't be dwelling any further in this discussion as it will not move. you are still free to disagree and i can't change your faith, but perhaps you can keep back to the thread.
hope to see more photographic posting from you. cheers.
Glad you 'will not dwell any further in this discussion'...gzz..Its just a photoshop discussion, keep it this way, and everyone just ignore those who does..
Invasion is bilateral?? Whatever .... Anyway you are right .... no point taking it to another level. just wanted to express my opinion. Have a good national day. cheers
- Status
Similar threads
