Caption of pic.~

Henry is doing a paper in history to be able to get a good grade in this class. This was being done in class 113 and was done due to him seeming to be an outstanding student for working.

About the pic.~

The subjects name is Henry. He's doing work from the book, a little bit of history. He's doing this to get a good grade, this was done on January 14th, 2009.

First photo evaluations.~

1.Only thing in sharp focus is the person in the chair.
A. The filing cabnet is not in focus while everything else is.
B. The filing cabnet was in the light.
2. There ish good contrast. Except the filing cabnet. The light ruined it.
3.No... Pay better attention to what I'm doing.
4. No?
5.Yes.

First Photo!

Number 6.~

It works by messing with our views how we view things, see things, working on our reality. It challenges our morlas since that's not how she really looks?

Number5.~

Honestly I don't think there is a difference in fashion photography and photojournalism.

Number 4.~

I do believe any form of drastic change is bad. However it's technically good if no one can tell you changed it. It doesn't matter if you can get away with it? But I think maybe.. Facial changes for like model's, or something to that affect are okay.

Number 3.~

Yes. Let's say you were making a photo for the newspaper. This is an example infrnedgement[spelling?]. It's a crime, a federal crime. It can and will get you jail duty.

Number 2.~

No. It's wrong wise but it helps us view what in our eye's or what we percieve as 'beautiful', though may in reality not be that, it's what we're forced to see.

Number 1.~

The model's face had been tucked. They got rid of her dimpels, her eye's were shallowed, her eye lid's raised, all. They changed her look more, her neck get's longer, her eye's bigger. They drasticcly change her hair, darkening it, styling it.

Online_edit

Yearbook_edit

Newspaper_edit

Most unethical

This set looks easily changed. it's funny on how easily noticably it is. It's easy, very to tell.

Least unethical

It isn't changed much, it doesn't even look messed with.

Unethical photo's~

A. Someone had mainipulated the photos to make the phto taken by Menahem Kahana. They used Adobe Photoshop or some type of softwear similar to that to copy over the aready taking phto. Now not only was this done on the first day of April, U.S. April Fool's Day. Kahana’s image appeared in Yated Neeman, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish newspaper in which someone tampered with these photo's, this being a terminal offense in the U.S.

B. It's unethical due to the fact that the phto isn't original. It is tampered with so it's not ethical, it's fake.

Third picture~

This picture I believe uses Balance. Honestly how, no idea.

Second picture~

This picture uses Lines as it's coposition. The lines lead you through this pic.

First picture

This picture uses simplicity as it's composition.

Negative presentation and thoughts~

1.I honestly think half my photos came out horrible... If not all. Er. They look terrible to be honest.
2. Half of them. Due to lighting, bad composition. Many reasons, these pictures came out terrible due to low lighting mostly. The composition was more like poor chocie of trying for rule of thirds, cropping, etc.
3.I believe on my second row of pictures, the second. It has great light, not too dark. It looks well, I hope it'll come out good I'm hoping.
4. Exposure! My photo was exposed to just the right amount of light, wasn't left out too long, it came out very well.
5. I believe it'd be background. I tried for a simple background in it.