Pro photographer's photos found to be faked

Messages
5,918
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#2
If he caims that they are straight images, they are fakes?
If he claims that they are composite impressions, then no problem.
 
Messages
7,043
Edit My Images
No
#4
NG clearly (now?) lack the expertise to review the validity of photographs submitted.

The photographer has stated she takes the blame for any misrepresentation but with a couple of caveats. Sadly for her this will put the spotlight on any of her work where others could have done supplemental work for her???
 
Messages
5,918
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#5
I don't think you read the article Terry,
She's a she.
I Did but forgot whhen I was writig a generic answer. Rather than a personal one. My answer applies to anyone doing what I would call imaginative compositions, rather than truthful ones.

However i do not much approve of showing such work but relying on others to do the difficult stuff. Then calling it your own.
 
Last edited:

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
11,967
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
NG clearly (now?) lack the expertise to review the validity of photographs submitted.

The photographer has stated she takes the blame for any misrepresentation but with a couple of caveats. Sadly for her this will put the spotlight on any of her work where others could have done supplemental work for her???
I think you're being overly kind to the photographer.

The first article in the sequence [1] questioned some repetitive detail in the Milky Way in one particular image. The photographer's response is that that particular image was stitched by an intern and the artefacts may have been created by the stitching process. She's accepted responsibility for a failure of quality control.

However the second article [2] demonstrates that her images are absolutely full of manipulation, up to and includung using a Southern hemisphere foreground and a Northern hemisphere sky. That's not just an incompetent intern and a lack of quality control. That's a systematic attempt to deceive. It's wholesale fraud. She says "I did not intentionally try to hide anything" but that is clearly a blatant lie.

She tried to blame it on an intern and she tried to get sympathy for her hectic schedule and her recent bereavement. How low can you get?

[1] This Milky Way photo on Nat Geo is raising eyebrows - https://petapixel.com/2019/05/07/this-milky-way-photo-on-nat-geo-is-raising-eyebrows/
[2]
Scientific errors in those Nat Geo Milky Way photos - https://petapixel.com/2019/05/10/scientific-errors-in-those-nat-geo-milky-way-photos/
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,158
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
Pretty lame excuses if you ask me. Sad to see it got through the net too. At least it’s all out in the open now eh?
 
Messages
7,043
Edit My Images
No
#8
I think you're being overly kind to the photographer.

The first article in the sequence [1] questioned some repetitive detail in the Milky Way in one particular image. The photographer's response is that that particular image was stitched by an intern and the artefacts may have been created by the stitching process. She's accepted responsibility for a failure of quality control.

However the second article [2] demonstrates that her images are absolutely full of manipulation, up to and includung using a Southern hemisphere foreground and a Northern hemisphere sky. That's not just an incompetent intern and a lack of quality control. That's a systematic attempt to deceive. It's wholesale fraud. She says "I did not intentionally try to hide anything" but that is clearly a blatant lie.

She tried to blame it on an intern and she tried to get sympathy for her hectic schedule and her recent bereavement. How low can you get?

[1] This Milky Way photo on Nat Geo is raising eyebrows - https://petapixel.com/2019/05/07/this-milky-way-photo-on-nat-geo-is-raising-eyebrows/
[2]
Scientific errors in those Nat Geo Milky Way photos - https://petapixel.com/2019/05/10/scientific-errors-in-those-nat-geo-milky-way-photos/
Ah! a deeper & more extensive matter than I had initially 'clocked'.
Pretty lame excuses if you ask me. Sad to see it got through the net too. At least it’s all out in the open now eh?
I think I recall a while back a wedding photographer who failed her clients making similar'ish excuses as the reason(s) for a lower than usual standard of service.....so not unique in that regard :(
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,176
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
#9
Not surprising, I once had feedback on a Milky Way pic advising me to improve it with clone stamping etc and that it didn’t matter as photos are art not science.
 
Messages
338
Edit My Images
No
#10
Her reply to the accusations comes across as classic "the dog ate my homework". It will be interesting to see what National Geographic does about this.
 
Messages
1,393
Edit My Images
No
#11
Let's not condemn her too quickly. Perhaps there was a transient large-scale warp in the space-time continuum that created an otherwise astronomically impossible view, and she captured it perfectly innocently?
 
Messages
4,951
Name
Elliott
Edit My Images
No
#12
Not surprising, I once had feedback on a Milky Way pic advising me to improve it with clone stamping etc and that it didn’t matter as photos are art not science.
Some photos are art or taken for artistic purposes, so that feedback could be perfectly fine depending on the context and where you posted the image.
 
Messages
1,855
Name
Glenn
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
I thought this was going to be about a different photographer that sells amazing prints for thousands of dollars... I don't have a problem with image manipulation to achieve an artistic result, but that's not what I'd expect to see in such a prestigious publication.
 
Messages
5,918
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#15
The pictures are what people would buy to put on their walls. They are hardly scientific studies.
 
Messages
1,378
Name
D
Edit My Images
Yes
#16
I happened upon this article a few days ago and was pretty shocked reading it. I don't get involved in taking such photos so perhaps am out of the loop, but the number of inconsistencies was staggering and as more of a 'consumer' than a creator than these type of images - anything beyond basic post processing should be declared, especially in a publication like NG. From a 'hobbyist' point of view, you may look at photos in publications like this as something to aim for and to learn 'interns' and quality control are involved and it all gets a bit demoralising. i didn't know interns etc were part of this world, so perhaps I am naive.

if it's a photo thats going to be mass produced, perhaps its 'ok' but in NG - then no, but i'd still expect such heavy post processing to be declared. Perhaps a separate category for such images...
 
Messages
5,918
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#17
I happened upon this article a few days ago and was pretty shocked reading it. I don't get involved in taking such photos so perhaps am out of the loop, but the number of inconsistencies was staggering and as more of a 'consumer' than a creator than these type of images - anything beyond basic post processing should be declared, especially in a publication like NG. From a 'hobbyist' point of view, you may look at photos in publications like this as something to aim for and to learn 'interns' and quality control are involved and it all gets a bit demoralising. i didn't know interns etc were part of this world, so perhaps I am naive.

if it's a photo thats going to be mass produced, perhaps its 'ok' but in NG - then no, but i'd still expect such heavy post processing to be declared. Perhaps a separate category for such images...
I thing quite heavy post processing is the norm for shooting starfields. however packing them out with clones takes them from a scientific interest catagory to a purely artistic one. The lengths that astro photographers go to, to create their images is quite staggering, and what they produce in mind blowing But totally false and can not be seen by visible light.
 
Messages
1,378
Name
D
Edit My Images
Yes
#18
@Terrywoodenpic yes from what i read just on these forums about people taking astro stuff there is a long of stacking and things and all sounds very time consuming - but as you say cloning to add things that simply are not there is totally different to bringing something out in PP that is there but just not visible. The person in the article is just taking it too far - esp with something like a sky from one hemisphere and the foreground from another!
 
Top