Soviets hoaxed famous Berlin photo; well at least partially.

[Kacen]

BERLIN — It’s an iconic image of World War II: Berlin has fallen and Soviet soldiers are hoisting the red flag over the Reichstag.

What most people don’t realize, however, is that the photograph isn’t capturing the historic moment. Yevgeni Khaldei staged the scene on May 2, 1945 — three days after the Soviets captured Germany’s parliament building.

The picture is the centerpiece of an exhibit — ‘‘Yevgeni Khaldei — The Decisive Moment’’ — that bills itself as the first comprehensive retrospective of the photographer’s World War II work.

The show at Berlin’s Gropius-Bau museum reveals the extent to which Khaldei’s work as a war correspondent and later a staff photographer for Pravda blurred the boundaries between photojournalism, art and propaganda.

For Russians, the Reichstag photo is as potent a symbol of victory as Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal’s shot of the U.S. flag being raised on the Japanese island of Iwo Jima is for Americans.

But the Reichstag image was heavily manipulated: Smoke in the background was etched later on the negative, to create the impression the battle was still unfolding.

In another version, a soldier’s wristwatches have been deftly edited out lest they give the impression he looted them.

Ernst Volland, one of the exhibit’s curators, calls the Reichstag photo ‘‘120 percent propaganda’’ — especially since it was made to order according to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin’s specifications.

‘‘Stalin badly wanted the combination of Reichstag and the red flag,’’ Volland said.

Another image shows a tank planted in front of the Brandenburg Gate, while a straight line of fighter planes soar overhead. Closer scrutiny reveals that the tank is a cutout from another picture and the planes are painted into the frame.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/world/1007 ... 08.article (http://www.suntimes.com/news/world/1007020,germ061508.article)

I'll be sure to use this as ammunition the next time some commie spouts nonsense about the moon landing being hoaxed.

[Foxtrot Oscar]

For Russians, the Reichstag photo is as potent a symbol of victory as Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal’s shot of the U.S. flag being raised on the Japanese island of Iwo Jima is for Americans.

Which was also staged... allegedly.

And the black soldier was painted white, according to Spike Lee.

Fox

[Kacen]

For Russians, the Reichstag photo is as potent a symbol of victory as Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal’s shot of the U.S. flag being raised on the Japanese island of Iwo Jima is for Americans.

Which was also staged... allegedly.

And the black soldier was painted white, according to Spike Lee.

Fox

Allegedly.

And Spike Lee is an actor, not an historian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Sousley (K.I.A.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlon_Block (K.I.A.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Strank (K.I.A.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bradley_(Iwo_Jima)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rene_Gagnon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira_Hayes

None are African-American, however the last one was Native American, and that was not covered up.

And Honestly...

http://patriotpost.us/news/images/iwojima1.jpg

How could you make heads or tails of anyone's race in that picture? Barely any skin is showing in the soldier's, and the one with the most skin showing (the arm) is the Native American, which in a black and white photo would be hard to distinguish from a white person anyway.

The only controversy about the flag raising was the indenties of each of the people, but that appears to be resolved now:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Raising_the_Flag_outline.png

There were two flag raisings (the famous one and the one showed here is the second), but the second one being staged is a rumor, it is not confirmed. And even if it was, it wasn't photo-edited.

Just because something was used for propaganda purposes, does not mean it was staged for propaganda purposes.

[Foxtrot Oscar]

Sense of humour.

FAIL

Fox

:lol:

[Kacen]

This was meant as a serious thread, so I took all answers seriously.

There is no history forum, so I posted it here.

[Bitchkoma]

It's not like the Red Army didn't roll into Berlin back then. So I'm not sure why this is... important or relevant. Every nation uses propaganda and every nation has staged events for propaganda purposes. In fact, propaganda has been around since the dawn of history.

[the titan]

It's not like the Red Army didn't roll into Berlin back then. So I'm not sure why this is... important or relevant. Every nation uses propaganda and every nation has staged events for propaganda purposes. In fact, propaganda has been around since the dawn of history.


Like the propaganda that if you don't believe in God, you will go to hell?

[Bitchkoma]

Like the propaganda that if you don't believe in God, you will go to hell?


I wasn't thinking of that exactly, but I was thinking of The Old Testament nonetheless.

[mojo]

So what!!
You don't think the US staged propaganda pics during Vietnam!
Or the British during WW2!
Or any other government during times of crisis!

The biggest illusion here is that you think the "communists" have done something that no other victorious army has ever done.
Anyone remember the picture of Saddam's statue being dragged to the ground and smashed to bits. You reckon those TV camera's just happened to be passing by.

:lol:

As a matter of fact you could probably trace this sort of propaganda back to ancient times when the victorious army's would would ride through the streets of captured cities with the population lining the roads clapping and cheering while soldiers with swords bared stood behind them.

Nothing to see here, move on.

:D

[Kacen]

Yeah but we didn't photo-edit tanks and dust and stuff in. While things may have been staged for propaganda, we never edited it in modern times for propaganda.

Heck, photo-editing was Stalin's thing, every time he killed one of his officers he'd have any photo with them in it edited out.

...wonder how they did it so well, it's not like they had photoshop back then.

[mojo]

How many people died because the russians took a faked photo after the war had finished.
Compare that to how many peoiple died due to faked media reports to escalate or start a war.

Faked story of an enemy attack so that Lyndon Johnson could use it as an excuse to escalate the war in Vietnam. How many more people died because of this.

lib.store.yahoo.net (http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNReportRevealsVietnam.html)


But he said that probably the "most historically significant feature" of the declassified report was the retelling of the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident.
That was a reported North Vietnamese attack on American destroyers that helped lead to president Lyndon Johnson's sharp escalation of American forces in Vietnam.
The author of the report "demonstrates that not only is it not true, as (then US) secretary of defense Robert McNamara told Congress, that the evidence of an attack was 'unimpeachable,' but that to the contrary, a review of the classified signals intelligence proves that 'no attack happened that night,'" FAS said in a statement.
"What this study demonstrated is that the available intelligence shows that there was no attack. It's a dramatic reversal of the historical record," Aftergood said.

Faked photograph's used to sway opinion of congressman to attack Iraq.


www.counterpunch.org (http://www.counterpunch.org/brasch09032007.html)


top officials of the CIA showed select members of Congress three photographs it alleged were Iraqi Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), better known as drones. Kanjorski said he was told that the drones were capable of carrying nuclear, biological, or chemical agents, and could strike 1,000 miles inland of east coast or west coast cities.
Kanjorski said he and four or five other congressmen in the room were told UAVs could be on freighters headed to the U.S. Both secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and President Bush wandered into and out of the briefing room, Kanjorski said.
Kanjorski said it was the second time he was called to the White House for a briefing. He had opposed giving the President the powers to go to war, and said that he hadn't changed his mind after a first meeting. Until he saw the pictures, Kanjorski said, "I hadn't thought that Iraq was a threat." That second meeting changed everything. After he left that meeting, said Kanjorski, he was willing to give the President the authorization he wanted since the drones "represented an imminent danger."
Kanjorski said he went to see Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), a retired Marine colonel. Murtha, said Kanjorski, "turned white" when told about the drones; Murtha, a former intelligence officer, believed that such information was classified.
Several years later, Kanjorski said he learned that the pictures were "a god-damned lie," apparently taken by CIA photographers in the desert in the southwest of the U.S. The drone story itself had already been disproved, although not many major media carried that story.

Then there is the hanky panky of the pollies, you say Stalin i say Bush. :D


This political ad for George W. Bush, as he was running for President, shows a sea of soldiers as a back drop to a child holding a flag. This image was digitally doctored by copying and pasting, from this original photograph, several soldiers to digitally remove Bush from a podium. After acknowledging that the photo had been doctored, the Bush campaign said that the ad would be re-edited and re-shipped to TV stations.



This digital composite appeared on a campaign flyer for New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Virginia Fields. The picture shows Fields standing with a diverse group of people. Fields' chief campaign consultant, Joe Mercurio, admitted the picture was a composite of four separate photos. The picture, according to Mercurio, was meant to show that she has broad support and was not intended to deceive anyone.



A political video produced by the Republican National Committee (RNC) depicts a U.S. solider watching a television where Democratic leaders are speaking critically of the Bush administration's handling of the war in Iraq. The final screen shot, shown to the right, reads "Our soldiers are watching and our enemies are too." As shown in this original frame, this video was digitally altered -- the solider was watching the movie How the Grinch Stole Christmas.



This controversial ad appeared as part of the Ohio Senate campaign between incumbent Mike DeWine (R) and challenger Sherrod Brown (D). DeWine's campaign created a video of the World Trade Center in flames to attack Brown as soft on terrorism. The ad shows the south tower burning -- the north tower was hit first, however, so the south tower could not be burning without the north tower burning as well. A DeWine spokesman acknowledged the image was a "graphic representation" by the firm that produced the ad, which used a still photo of the towers with computer-generated smoke added.


Not trying to start an argument here Kacen but to imply that the Russians were the only ones to engage in this sort of thing is disingenous at best.
One of the very earliest ever "photoshopped" images was one of Abraham Lincoln's head on some other blokes body, to make hime look more regal or something i guess.

You don't see "commies" everywhere do you? :)

[Martian Exile]

And let's not forget how Mr. Hearst got us into the war with Spain!