Artistically edited cover photo displeases
Your cover image (Feb. 5) strikes me enough to pause and take time out to comment on an edited image. It is obvious that the standard color correction, brightness and CMYK conversion has been done, but on top of that somewhere along the line your newspaper decided to paint on the image. Of course, the image I am speaking of is the image of two basketball players that appears on your cover page. I suggest your readers go back and take a look at the black edges in the frame.
I wonder if your photographer was not able to get a good full-frame image and so felt the need to paint a border around a bad one? Or was his choice coming from a more artistic bent and just thought he would be creative?
Now, I am not a purist and don’t mind some retouching on images to make them more pleasing to look at. I myself, being a photography student, have made that choice many times, though I try and make sure to get good images first then add interesting elements on top of that.
The real problem is, you’re a newspaper and not a magazine or artistic publication. Nor was the subject a staged image or at least one intentionally created for artistic use versus documentary/reporting. This was an image created to record an actual event that was chosen to accompany text written to document what happened. And yet someone along the path between photographer and final printer chose to doctor the image “artistically.”
I will end by pointing out how slippery a slope this can be when a news organization starts altering pixel data (images) for content versus accurate color and exposure during final output.