We all live in a Photoshop World
Clearly it's possible there is no program that might evoke more discussion on it's use (or misuse, some might say) than Adobe Photoshop. Frankly I've heard the arguments and many are only opinion or an attempt to argue for the sake of argument.
The fact is manipulation of images has been around for a long time. That this ability is available to everyone is what worries some. So was it OK when only an 'elite group' had this power? First of all, images that are used in a court of law have to reach a certain level to be admisable as evidence. For some, this is the only issue to be concerned about.
Here's an important fact, I would say that it's safe to say that virtually every digital photo shot by a professional photographer today it tweaked in someway in Photoshop. This ranges from simple color correction to major manipulation of the image.
Now I'm not sure what program is being used to manipulate the video images in the video clip above, but it is doing the same thing that Photoshop can do for still images. The technique that is being used above, is thestate-of-the-art way to manipulate moving images. The method used in the past was called 'Film matte painting', which was basically shooting the scene through a clear glass that had a painted image in the areas of the scene to be replaced. Matte painting had its roots in still photography. In the mid-19th century, photographers began using double-exposure techniques to composite two distinct images into one photograph. In the Victorian era, so-called spirit photography captured the imagination of the masses. In these photos, ghostly apparitions seemed to mingle with the living. They were, in reality, simple darkroom tricks.
In 1905, a man named Norman Dawn was working as a still photographer in Los Angeles. He was disappointed when one of his shots came back partially blocked by a telephone pole. A colleague told Dawn to go take the picture again, but this time to bring along a piece of glass with an image of a tree painted on it. Hold the piece of glass between the camera and the building and use the fake tree to cover the pole. It was a simple old photographer's trick, but proved a convincing illusion and you might say a manual form of 'Photoshop'.
So while it is fun to watch this video (I watched it a few times) the point is these TV shows and movies do not say which scenes have been manipulated. To me if no statement is being made as to the image being some factual representation of a particular moment in history, etc. then Photoshop usage is most likely fair game. And let's face, this is nothing new. It's been around almost since the very beginning of photography.
Copyright MMX Ed Justice, Jr.