Digital post-production, with its constantly evolving tools and editing programs, allows us to transform our photography in ways unimaginable just a few years ago. However, the ever-advancing digital tools at our disposal also present the ability to deceive viewers through sophisticated photo manipulation, which is as threatening to objective photojournalism as it is useful to creative photography.
The World Press Photo Foundation (WPP), which hosts one of the most prestigious photo contests on the planet, recently addressed this concern with its newly released “Photo Contest Code of Ethics,” which outlines how to responsibly and ethically work with photos in digital post production. The rules not only address recent controversy within the WPP; they raise the debate about the malleability of digital photography, especially where photojournalism is concerned.
Photo manipulation at WPP
World Press Photo didn’t roll out these post-production rules after being struck by a sudden revelation on photo ethics. These guidelines follow perhaps WPP’s biggest scandal in its 60-year history. Earlier this year, WPP shocked many by announcing that it would strip the first place prize from a recent winner, Giovanni Troilio, after it was revealed that he misrepresented the location where a photo was shot in his award winning “Contemporary Issues” series, “The Dark Heart of Europe.”
The controversy didn’t end there, however. WPP subsequently announced that 20 percent of finalists were disqualified for violating its post-production rules.
The new rules now hold WPP contest entrants to much clearer and more explicit rules on what to do (and what not to do) with their photojournalism:
Entrants to the World Press Photo contest must ensure their pictures provide an accurate and fair representation of the scene they witnessed so the audience is not misled.
This means that entrants:
1. Should be aware of the influence their presence can exert on a scene they photograph, and should resist being misled by staged photo opportunities.
2. Must not intentionally contribute to, or alter, the scene they picture by re-enacting or staging events.
3. Must maintain the integrity of the picture by ensuring there are no material changes to content.
4. Must ensure captions are accurate.
5. Must ensure the editing of a picture story provides an accurate and fair representation of its context.
6. Must be open and transparent about the entire process through which their pictures are made, and be accountable to the World Press Photo Foundation for their practice.
Drawing the line: When does it become manipulation?
This May, following the controversy, WPP hosted a forum on current industry standards in post-production, addressing underlying concerns stemming from the previous year’s contest.
WPP managing director Lars Boering walked through several photos manipulated in ways very similar to the 20 WPP finalist entries disqualified for the addition or removal of details. The changes made to several photos were seemingly inconsequential: toning a window black or removing a cigarette butt. The examples begged the question: At what point does routinely touching up a photo become deceiving an audience?
However, there are plenty of examples where photo manipulation goes way too far. Here are 10 examples of widely circulated photo manipulation:
Don McCullin on Digital Photography: ‘A totally lying kind of experience’
Don McCullin, one of Great Britain’s most renowned war photographers, recently gave an interview with The Guardian in which he took a firmly negative stance against digital photography, saying post-production tools allow it to be “a totally lying kind of experience.”
Although McCullin, 80, has employed digital equipment in the field, he said the digital revolution has produced an environment where viewers can no longer place trust in the news photos they see.
“The digital cameras are extraordinary. I have a dark room and I still process film but digital photography can be a totally lying kind of experience, you can move anything you want … the whole thing can’t be trusted really,” McCullin told The Guardian.
WPP on Future Digital Photojournalism
As the WPP forum on photo manipulation drew to a close, Boering acknowledged that WPP’s controversy indeed indicated a larger problem throughout the industry regarding digital photography manipulation. Many disagreed about what kind of industry-wide rules should be enforced, or whether rules of any kind would be too stifling for photographers. One forum attendee, however, commented the underlying goal the industry should work toward: A photojournalist should “show it as it is, now how we would like it to be shown.”
