nuordr Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 who cares?i'd much rather this thread be a discussion of how much better those uniforms look in green than pretending to be outraged that someone photoshopped a color change.cause seriously, they look great in that green pic.They definitely looked better than their black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC in Da House w/o a Doubt Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 I think they took the article down? Does anyone have pictures?Deadspin has a pic that let's you drag along it to see it go from original pic to edited version. Usefulhttp://deadspin.com/5964425/why-did-sports-illustrated-colorize-baylors-black-uniforms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoknight Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Nobody has mentioned the obvious problem with this photo.Baylor's color-on-color numbers look TERRIBLE. The gold trim is just putting a ribbon on a turd. 5th in NAT. TITLES | 2nd in CONF. TITLES | 5th in HEISMAN | 7th in DRAFTS | 8th in ALL-AMER | 7th in WINS | 4th in BOWLS | 1st in SELLOUTS | 1st GAMEDAY SIGN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrypep Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 A reply to the article via the Comments section directly below the article:"What I am about to post does not reflect the position of Sports Illustrated but rather my own opinion….that of the former photography editor of SI and the curator of the Leading Off section. My assumption as to what occurred here was an honest mistake and not an intentional manipulation. Here’s why. The photo in question is at least a stop under exposed. I am guessing that one of the good people in the imaging department, who take great pride in making the pictures look as good as possible on the printed page, opened it up in Photoshop and hit a white point for color balance on one of the Kansas State player’s uniform. (For those of you at home, I encourage you to copy the original image off the blog and attempt this yourself.) The result will show green on parts of the Baylor jerseys. This is one of the vagaries of Photoshop….it will show you what the program believes are the true colors. And when you brighten the image overall to compensate for one stop under exposure, it only exacerbates the problem. Using this data, they corrected as they thought the image should read. Should it have been caught after a proof was made? Probably. But I can tell you first hand that many things fall between the cracks on deadline.I am the first to admit intentional manipulation. Many of you may remember I did so regarding a photo that ran in SI many years ago while I was still in their employ. This doesn’t seem to be the case here. Is it misleading? Yes. Was it intentional? Someone behind closed doors saying, “Let’s change the color of the uniforms today?” I doubt it. But SI has done the prudent thing here. They recognized and admitted the error and will be publishing a correction in their next issue. Nuff said." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas718 Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Magazines manipulate photos all the time, and have been doing it for years. Someone just screwed up and got the color wrong. No big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattb6 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 posted in sports illustrated this week wasCORRECTION: Because of a production error, this Leading Off photo from Baylor's 52-24 upset of No. 1 Kansas State was incorrectly colorized in the Nov. 26 issue. Sports Illustrated regrets the error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nash61 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 A reply to the article via the Comments section directly below the article:"What I am about to post does not reflect the position of Sports Illustrated but rather my own opinion….that of the former photography editor of SI and the curator of the Leading Off section. My assumption as to what occurred here was an honest mistake and not an intentional manipulation. Here’s why. The photo in question is at least a stop under exposed. I am guessing that one of the good people in the imaging department, who take great pride in making the pictures look as good as possible on the printed page, opened it up in Photoshop and hit a white point for color balance on one of the Kansas State player’s uniform. (For those of you at home, I encourage you to copy the original image off the blog and attempt this yourself.) The result will show green on parts of the Baylor jerseys. This is one of the vagaries of Photoshop….it will show you what the program believes are the true colors. And when you brighten the image overall to compensate for one stop under exposure, it only exacerbates the problem. Using this data, they corrected as they thought the image should read. Should it have been caught after a proof was made? Probably. But I can tell you first hand that many things fall between the cracks on deadline.I am the first to admit intentional manipulation. Many of you may remember I did so regarding a photo that ran in SI many years ago while I was still in their employ. This doesn’t seem to be the case here. Is it misleading? Yes. Was it intentional? Someone behind closed doors saying, “Let’s change the color of the uniforms today?” I doubt it. But SI has done the prudent thing here. They recognized and admitted the error and will be publishing a correction in their next issue. Nuff said."I took the two pictures to my photography teacher, who is a newspaper photographer and is super sticky on ethics. He basically said the same thing. On September 20, 2012 at 0:50 AM, 'CS85 said: It's like watching the hellish undead creakily shuffling their way out of the flames of a liposuction clinic dumpster fire. On February 19, 2012 at 9:30 AM, 'pianoknight said: Story B: Red Wings go undefeated and score 100 goals in every game. They also beat a team comprised of Godzilla, the ghost of Abraham Lincoln, 2 Power Rangers and Betty White. Oh, and they played in the middle of Iraq on a military base. In the sand. With no ice. Santa gave them special sand-skates that allowed them to play in shorts and t-shirts in 115 degree weather. Jesus, Zeus and Buddha watched from the sidelines and ate cotton candy. POTD 5/24/12, POTD 2/26/17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadSeed84 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I messed around with the original pic in photoshop with curves and levels.And the shoulders and a part underneath the armpit does look indeed green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 FWIW: A while back, a photographer was fired from a newspaper for using PS to remove a telephone wire that ran in front of a house in a picture he had taken for a story. (He thought the shot looked better with the wire removed. I'm sure it did, I remove wires from outdoor shots all the time.) I don't know how it works with covering sports, but altering a news photograph is highly frowned upon. Changing exposure to make a pic more visible is one thing, but changing the color of the team, while harmless, is altering the "reality" of the "news" the picture is supposed to represent. SI hangs their hat on their photography. They should have caught this before it went to press. While SI's transgression is relatively minor, it does cross that "altering reality" line.Is it a big deal in the grand scheme of things? Probably not, but SI was right to note what had happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 who cares?i'd much rather this thread be a discussion of how much better those uniforms look in green than pretending to be outraged that someone photoshopped a color change.cause seriously, they look great in that green pic.It is a big deal because it changes the fact of the event.Yes, it may be just a football game but the media shouldn't change anything about it to make it more convenient for themselves or for any other reason. They are supposed to cover the event not change the facts of it in anyway.I work in media and often see evidence of this kind of thing outside sports in smaller ways. I hate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.