One car accident today

**JoeGearhart** · 03-04-2009, 05:10 PM

I saw this at 5:45p, when I got home from work. A car hit a telephone pole. When I saw what happened, a firetruck was just leaving the scene. The driver was already gone (to the hospital, I presume). This is just behind my house, so I grabbed my camera and took a couple pictures.

Here's where it happened (highlighted in yellow). I live on Douglas St. This happened on Indiana Ave.

Here are the couple pictures I took - with links to super high res copies (the super high res copies are about 5mb each):

(Super High Res)

(Super High Res)

The telephone pole looks like it's about to buckle/fall but it's still standing. Hope everyone's ok.

**JoeGearhart** · 03-04-2009, 05:25 PM

Two more pictures. Looks like the utility company showed up to look at the pole:

(Super High Res)

(Super High Res)

I wasn't sure if I'd get in trouble if I got closer, so sorry they aren't better quality.

**HoosierHelen** · 03-04-2009, 08:20 PM

Yep, probably a good idea for the utility company to review that pole. Good pics Joe!

**evilkumquat** · 03-04-2009, 10:51 PM

Here's a question for our KPC professionals:

To what extent can Photoshop be used to enhance photos to clarify the subject?

I know composing runs the filter to highlight shadows and kill some of the really bad contrast (to make black and white printing on the cheap paper more legible), but what about running filters to make the shots more colorful or pleasing to the eye?

Some of the attached photos are similar to ones I regularly receive at my day job where I usually run them though various filters on Photoshop to enhance or recolor for a more "pleasing" shot. But for the purpose of journalistic integrity, if such pictures were used by the newspaper as an "official" document, how much enhancement does journalistic integrity allow?

I'm not finding fault with the photos, Joe, but rather these were taken in lower-light conditions and software exists to artificially lighten them.

This was just a question that popped in the old noggin.

**james_t** · 03-05-2009, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by evilkumquat

Here's a question for our KPC professionals:

To what extent can Photoshop be used to enhance photos to clarify the subject?

I'm hoping one of the print guys will hop on here, but if not, here's what they basically told me:

Lighting adjustments and cropping are fair game. This can come in particularly handy if you happened to have the wrong F-Stop set on your camera.

However, don't mess with the content of the photo. (Sorry, clone tool, you stay in the toolbox.) Marturello said there was a Toledo Blade photographer who got in trouble not too long ago because he made a habit of taking content he didn't like (like a pole inconveniently placed behind a subject's head) out of the photo. That's a no-no.

**evilkumquat** · 03-05-2009, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by james_t

I'm hoping one of the print guys will hop on here, but if not, here's what they basically told me:

Lighting adjustments and cropping are fair game. This can come in particularly handy if you happened to have the wrong F-Stop set on your camera.

However, don't mess with the content of the photo. (Sorry, clone tool, you stay in the toolbox.) Marturello said there was a Toledo Blade photographer who got in trouble not too long ago because he made a habit of taking content he didn't like (like a pole inconveniently placed behind a subject's head) out of the photo. That's a no-no.

Hah! Photoshop is the lazy photographer's best friend!

Didn't frame the photo right? Got a tree branch sticking out of your subject's head? Got a garbage can or an inconveniently placed car in front of a garage?

Photoshop Hero... dah dah dah DAH dah dah! (to the tune of "Jukebox Hero")

**james_t** · 03-05-2009, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by evilkumquat

Hah! Photoshop is the lazy photographer's best friend!

There was a photographer who spoke at the HSPA conference last fall who absolutely refuses to use PhotoShop - what he shoots goes to print.

He's also good enough to do that. I'm definitely not.

**karlyt** · 03-06-2009, 09:54 AM

I wouldn't say that photoshop is a lazy photographer's best friend. Some of the lenses that I use are really old and have scratches or dust in them, and can't be removed. With the clone tool I'm able to remove them, without changing the integrity of the photo. Red eye is a common problem when a flash is used or with submitted photos, photoshop helps to fix it. I'm also able to lighten up photos that would be too dark to print in the paper or take a yellow wall, that is supposed to be white and correct it. My general rule is to try and take a photo to the best of your ability so that you DON'T have to photoshop anything. Like on camera cropping and using lighting properly so that you don't have to make many adjustments on the computer. Taking a telephone pole out of your photo is a HUGE no no. Dodging and burning can also get into unethical territory. The point of photojournalism (for me) is to show readers a window into the news...and document it properly. If you are making the photo (or news) something different then what was there, then you are being unethical. But that's just my two cents.