I have doubts it’s a “shot” based on the vibrant comp of the individual and their reaction to what’s in their proximity. But most noteably, the image isn’t 8:10 as the majority of cameras shoot. But it could be all real and, shit on a blad or something, and in that case it’s a stunning example of photojournalism.
Unfortunately, these are the times we live in now. Editting, photomanip, and now AI are all just too easy
This is a well-attested photo by a photographer at a reliable news org. Don’t denigrate this real person’s work by not giving it the courtesy of scrolling down to the comment that provides the source before assuming it to be AI.
Not sure what you’re trying to say tbh. What does that have to do with the author or quality of the pic?
And my apologies, but an error is disallowing me to edit the other reply.
“Shit” = “Shot”
I have doubts it’s a “shot” based on the vibrant comp of the individual and their reaction to what’s in their proximity. But most noteably, the image isn’t 8:10 as the majority of cameras shoot. But it could be all real and, shit on a blad or something, and in that case it’s a stunning example of photojournalism.
Unfortunately, these are the times we live in now. Editting, photomanip, and now AI are all just too easy
This is a well-attested photo by a photographer at a reliable news org. Don’t denigrate this real person’s work by not giving it the courtesy of scrolling down to the comment that provides the source before assuming it to be AI.
???
Many other formats exist and are extremely common (3:2, 1:1, 4:3…)
And more importantly, cropping is a thing.
Exactly right, Joe 👍
Who’s Joe???