Digital BW, The Print

> Thank god times have changed. That photo id a disgrace to all of 
> photojournalism.
> 
> Steve

Why?

Thank god times have changed. That photo id a disgrace to all of photojournalism.

Steve


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>
> Because he is a journalist. You have to be able to believe the
> photos he takes are real. It would be like a writer making up a
> quote.  If you can't believe what a writer is writing why bother
> reading the story. Same with a photojournalist. If you can\u2019t
> believe the photographs you see in the paper what is the point of
> having them. It\u2019s a credibility issue.  If you can't believe
> the information in the L.A. Times why read it.
>
> Steve

Oops - sorry Steve, I thought you were referring to the Gene Smith
photograph in the discussion

tim

PS - RE: LA Times - what about the photographs you don't see in the
paper...? How can you believe what you don't know (or not, as the case may
be) - that is, what's the point of honest journos

Good Question Steve?  How could anybody believe most of what they write 
in the LA Times?

:)

Jer


  If you can't believe the information in the L.A. Times why read it.

> Steve
>

Because he is a journalist. You have to be able to believe the photos he takes are real. It would be like a writer making up a quote.  If you can't believe what a writer is writing why bother reading the story. Same with a photojournalist. If you can’t believe the photographs you see in the paper what is the point of having them. It’s a credibility issue.  If you can't believe the information in the L.A. Times why read it.

Steve

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 03:39 PM 4/7/03 -0500, you wrote:
>Because he is a journalist. You have to be able to believe the photos he 
>takes are real. It would be like a writer making up a quote.  If you can't 
>believe what a writer is writing why bother reading the story. Same with a 
>photojournalist. If you can’t believe the photographs you see in the 
>paper what is the point of having them. It’s a credibility issue.  If 
>you can't believe the information in the L.A. Times why read it.
>
>Steve
>

Steve,

I wouldn't advise anyone to "believe"  what they read in a newspaper or see 
on TV.  One has to think critically, be a skeptic, verify.  I taught that 
to my kid back in the sixties same as my dad taught me.  The rule of P's: 
never trust the press, the politicians, the preachers, or the pedagogs.  Do 
you think the government is suddenly going to tell people the truth?  One 
glaring, current example is the push to change the FCC regs to allow 
further consolidation of media ownership. What, you haven't heard about 
that in the popular media???  Hmmmm - wonder why?  All those dedicated, 
honest, journalists are paid to illustrate stories for big business 
interests. If they don't provide grist for the mill they don't keep their 
jobs.

AZ



Build a Lookaround!
The Lookaround Book.
http://www.panoramacamera.us

Maybe you SHOULD watch more media coverage by the dreaded press.  That WAS
covered by the "popular media" just this past weekend-- in depth.

Bottom line is, what does ANY of this have to do with B&W printing? News
printed on newsprint does not strecth the topic.

Seth

=never trust the press, the politicians, the preachers, or the 
=pedagogs.  Do 
=you think the government is suddenly going to tell people the 
=truth?  One 
=glaring, current example is the push to change the FCC regs to allow 
=further consolidation of media ownership. What, you haven't 
=heard about 
=that in the popular media???  Hmmmm - wonder why?  All those

I NEVER use a Canon printer because of the technology they use.  That could
change in the future, but bubblejet inherently is not as sharp.

Seth

=
=Say I have a question that I ask about once every few weeks 
=that has never 
=gotten answered.  Do the Canon printers do "user size" like 
=the Epsons?  I 
=want to print pans.  The Canon specs only list "banner" size 
=which is a 
=fan-fold paper size.
=
=AZ
=
=

At 10:04 PM 4/7/03 -0500, you wrote:
>Maybe you SHOULD watch more media coverage by the dreaded press.  That WAS
>covered by the "popular media" just this past weekend-- in depth.
>
>Bottom line is, what does ANY of this have to do with B&W printing? News
>printed on newsprint does not strecth the topic.
>
>Seth
>
>=never trust the press, the politicians, the preachers, or the
>=pedagogs.  Do
>=you think the government is suddenly going to tell people the
>=truth?  One
>=glaring, current example is the push to change the FCC regs to allow
>=further consolidation of media ownership. What, you haven't
>=heard about
>=that in the popular media???  Hmmmm - wonder why?  All those


Seth,

You're right - the topic spilled over from another list and was about 
digital editing pictures - sort of digital BW :-)   I'll stay right on 
topic from now on.  Hey they got Sadam... oops!

Say I have a question that I ask about once every few weeks that has never 
gotten answered.  Do the Canon printers do "user size" like the Epsons?  I 
want to print pans.  The Canon specs only list "banner" size which is a 
fan-fold paper size.

AZ



Build a Lookaround!
The Lookaround Book.
http://www.panoramacamera.us

I'd like to use an on line print service for my quickie, give 'em to the
family stuff. Any recommendations? Anything to watch out for?

-Lew S