My POV post last week on digital alteration aroused the interest of some readers of TTP who shared with me their own views. Confirming what I wrote in the post, the general consensus is that removing or adding elements from/to the photograph is considered as unacceptable.
To illustrate my point that all photographs are in some way 'fixed', I chose this photograph by Oded Balilty of The Associated Press. It won the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for best Breaking News Photography, and its caption reads:
"A lone Jewish settler challenges Israeli security officers during clashes that erupted as authorities cleared the West Bank settlement of Amona, east of the Palestinian town of Ramallah."
A really excellent 'decisive moment' photograph, which perfectly encapsulates the drama of the event. However, let's examine it with a more clinical eye. It appears at first glance that the woman is holding off a whole mass of security officers, but is she? Was there anyone behind her, but because of the photographer's clever framing, appears to be on her own? Is she pushing back or is she on the verge of giving up and fleeing the scene? Is she being pushed back down the slope, or is she pushing back? And all these questions...are they even relevant...or does this snapshot in time unequivocally convey the story that the photographer seeks to tell us?
Frankly, I don't know the answer. My gut tells me that the caption describing the settler as "A lone Jewish..." is editorializing. I -nor presumably anyone else but Mr. Balilty who took the photograph- can say if she's really alone or not...the frame's in-camera cropping makes it appear that she is. What I take from this photograph is that many illegal settlers were forcibly removed by the Israeli security forces, and this woman was of the many who resisted.
Is this photograph manipulated in the real sense of the word? The answer is of course not...but through camera positioning and careful framing, the photograph conveys its intended message that the woman settler was alone.
_KIJU%20copy.jpg)
