Skip to main content

Update: World Press Photo to reevaluate post-processing rules after controversy

2012-world-press-photo-of-the-year
Image used with permission by copyright holder

Update: Despite its own investigation validating the authenticity of photographer Paul Hansen’s controversial 2013 Photo of the Year, the experts did find that a fair amount of post-processing was done to the photo – such as darkening and lightening of areas. This and the problems stemming from the accusation of photo manipulation were enough to make the World Press Photo reevaluate its rules surrounding image post-processing. The WPP will announce more details when it calls for entries later this year, but WPP chair Gary Knight said there will be a number of changes. (Via British Journal of Photography)

A powerful, emotional photo of two dead bodies – one a two-year-old boy, the other of his older brother – being carried through Gaza City in the Palestinian Territories to their funeral was recently chosen as the 2013 World Press Photo of the Year. The two boys were killed in an Israeli airstrike last November 14, which also killed their father and injured the rest of their family. The photo, “Gaza Burial,” was taken by photojournalist Paul Hansen for the Swedish daily, Dagens Nyheter, and shows the plight of civilians caught in the middle of a conflict between Israel and Palestinian militant groups, which, according to the World Press Photo, has killed more than 150 people – 103 civilians, including at least 30 children – since a ceasefire was brokered on November 21. But a new controversy about the photo was raised, and it has nothing to do with the subject matter: A forensic image analyst says the photo has had too much Photoshop manipulation, to the point that it has been deemed fake. The speculation that the photo had been falsified caused such a commotion that the World Press Photo launched a forensic investigation into the matter, and concludes that the photo is authentic.

As Imaging Resource’s Dan Havlik reported, a forensic image analyst named Neal Krawetz, “says the winning photo includes spliced together areas of three different shots, which was done to illuminate the faces of the mourners in the picture in order to make the scene more dramatic.” Krawetz says the shadows in the photo do not line up for the time of day the photo was taken.

“The shadows from the left wall line up with a consistent sun location. The sun isn’t exactly low but maybe the reported time is wrong. At least the sky brightens in the direction of the sun. Unfortunately, the lighting on the people does not match the sun’s position. The people should have dark shadows on their right sides (photo-left), but their facial lighting does not match the available lighting,” Krawetz wrote in a post for The Hacker Factor Blog. 
”So here’s what likely happened… The photographer took a series of photos. However, the sun’s position made everyone dark and in silhouette. So, he combined a few pictures and altered the people so you could see their faces.”

“The photograph by Paul Hansen, which has been selected as World Press Photo of the Year 2012 by the contest jury, has been subject to heated discussion about the level of enhancement of the image file,” the World Press Photo wrote in a statement. “Paul Hansen has previously explained in detail how he processed the image. World Press Photo has no reason to doubt his explanation. However, in order to curtail further speculation – and with full cooperation by Paul Hansen – we have asked two independent experts to carry out a forensic investigation of the image file.”

The World Press Photo has just concluded the investigation and published the independent investigators’ findings. “We have reviewed the RAW image, as supplied by World Press Photo, and the resulting published JPEG image. It is clear that the published photo was retouched with respect to both global and local color and tone. Beyond this, however, we find no evidence of significant photo manipulation or compositing. Furthermore, the analysis purporting photo manipulation is deeply flawed,” said Dr. Hany Farid, Professor of Computer Science at Dartmouth College and co-founder and CTO of Fourandsix Technologies and Kevin Connor, CEO of Fourandsix Technologies. Click here to read more of the findings.

Krawetz, however, believes he is vindicated in his claims. Read his response to the findings here.

(Image via Paul Hansen/World Press Photo

Les Shu
Former Digital Trends Contributor
I am formerly a senior editor at Digital Trends. I bring with me more than a decade of tech and lifestyle journalism…
How to hide photos on an Android phone or tablet
Google Photos

While today's best Android phones are quite secure as long as they remain locked with a passcode or biometrics like a fingerprint, by default those features only protect the front door. If someone picks up your phone while it's unlocked, there aren't typically any barriers that will keep them out of exploring everything from your contacts and emails to your photos.

This can be particularly challenging when it comes to photos, since those are the things we like to show off the most from our phones. We've likely all had those moments when we want to show a friend or co-worker a funny cat meme, so we hand over our phone and trust that they won't swipe right and see the photo of the hairy mole that we sent to our doctor that morning.

Read more
Best Sony A7 III deals: Save $300 on the full frame mirrorless camera
Sony A7 III

Sony A7 III Daven Mathies/Digital Trends / .

Even if you have one of the best camera phones at the moment, if you're a photography fanatic, you're probably feeling the burn for something new and exciting. For example, the Sony A7 III line is like none other in the world of handheld cameras and you can find several cameras in that line on sale right now at Best Buy. Here, we round up the best deals in the sale, then analyze how buying a Sony Alpha A7 III looks at the moment.
Today's best Sony A7 III deals

Read more
How to use (almost) any camera as a webcam for Zoom and more
how to use any camera as a web cam v2 00 58 01 still007

Cameras, even those in phones, brag about megapixels and lens specifications -- but laptops? Not so much. There’s a reason computer companies don’t say much about the webcams that come built into the bezels of their screens. Most of these cameras are low-quality, with tiny sensors and cheap lenses. Sure, they work for basic videoconferencing, but they aren’t very impressive and certainly leave us wanting something more.

While you could just buy a stand-alone webcam that connects over USB, to really take production value up a notch, you can opt for a DSLR or mirrorless camera. You’ll need a few workarounds to get this type of camera to be recognized as a webcam by your computer, but the trouble is worth it for the higher resolution, much better low-light performance, and cinematic background blur.

Read more