Photographer Run Amok Won't Be Paid By Atlantic

A photographer who bragged about capturing John McCain in an unflattering light, and who duped the presidential candidate into posing for an even less flattering picture will not be paid for her photo, and may find herself the subject of a lawsuit, according to reports.

Jill Greenberg, whose work can be seen online at her site -- somewhat appropriately named "Manipulator" -- originally shot the cover image for Atlantic scribe Jeffrey Goldberg's October cover story, "The Wars Of John McCain." The New York Post describes how the session went down:

Greenberg, known for her heavily retouched pics of apes and babies, boasted to Photo District News that she submitted photos of the Arizona senator to the mag while barely airbrushing them.

"I left his eyes red and his skin looking bad," she boasted.

Greenberg also crowed that she had tricked McCain into standing over a strobe light placed on the floor -- turning the septuagenarian's face into a horror show of shadows.

Asking McCain to "please come over here" for a final shot, Greenberg pretended to be using a standard modeling light.

The resulting photos depict McCain as devilish, with bulging brows and washed-out skin.

"He had no idea he was being lit from below," Greenberg said, adding that none of his entourage picked up on the light switch either. "I guess they're not very sophisticated," she said.

According to the Post, Atlantic editor James Bennet was "appalled" at Greenberg's antics, saying, "Her behavior is outrageous. Incredibly unprofessional."

And, indeed, it is! But Goldberg himself says it best, "Suffice it to say that her 'art' is juvenile, and on occasion repulsive. This is not the issue, of course; the issue is that she betrayed this magazine, and disgraced her profession."

Bennet, who told Fox News that Greenberg "violated the terms of our agreement with her," is drafting a letter of apology to McCain.

NOTE: As has been pointed out to me, drilling down into Greeberg's site will unearth several photo renderings of John McCain that at least one Obama supporter, in an email to me, describes as "childish." It's only too true that the existence of these images is a testament to the photographer's juvenile sensibilities, but they seem to be a matter distinct from the concerns that led the Atlantic to take the actions they have taken.

Comments

[mydoglucky]

John McCain regarding the smear book on Obama: "Ya just gotta have a sense of humor". Did Obama ask for an apology from those two morons and their Obama waffle box? Nope.

[Ivygreen]

Or the obama 3-dollar bill that depicts him in arab headdress that I saw the GOP at the Evergreen State Fair in Washington state giving away last month.

[ezbreezer]

He makes a great looking corpse.

[kayatarms]

If these pics were of Obama, and it being the same story, the McPOW campaign would be running as fast as they could to get them into negative campaign and print ads!

[biglover]

I wish everyone would stop cowtowing to this little weasel McCain. I have seen Obama's face on a Monkey's body. Why isn't anyone screaming about that?

[LondonTownNY]

The GOP already does that. Photos of Obama in their ads are darkened and they use more sinister angles.

[lthuedk 1]

Much worse than Bush. He wants what's left of the Middle Class. Fascism much?

War hero to ugly American-all in your face. What a con artist.

http://www.light-to-dark.com/finger_puppets.html

[LateeLady]

Okay, I agree that this was wrong. Obama can win this without stooping to this level of childish antics. We know he's old and not in the best of health, and a photo session to show just how badly he looks does nothing to frighten his base - other than use the age discrimination against the democrats.

[mscriblerus]

McCain loves this. The fundamentals of her photography were sound. Sometimes you just need to have a sense of humor. It's not like he's posing for photo to be used on currency(Like that jacked up photo they used for Obama).
Hey, it's all about everyone having a little fun, right. Isn't it a little sexist to criticize the poor woman for subscribing to the McCain campaign's political weltanschauung. He will surely give her props, like he did for Paris.She actually combined deception, manipulation, and a horrible attempt at humor. She doesn't need to apologize, she needs to join the McCain campaign. She can learn to lobby later.

[lthuedk 1]

Great work, Jill. You may have busted the shadiest politician ever.

[johnnygoodwud]

john mccain, 'we need to have a sense of humor in this campaign'. i agree mr. sharpay looking guy. sorry about spelling

[MikeDu]

What are you people talking about McCain's 'unflattering' photos? Most of the time the guy comes off looking like he's sculpted from silly putty in his photos. Greenberg's pictures make him look downright "Lincolnesque"! Since when is a man in his 70s with his 'history' etched across his face considered something grotesque? This reaction is much more of an insult to McCain than to Greenberg.

[estevancarlos]

My fist in the air for a true provocateur and artist.

[formlessness]

Though I understand not everyone has a bachelor's in Photography as I do, it is still almost impossible to not know you are being lit from below. There's one light in that shot, on the floor aimed up at John, for John or anyone from his campaign to claim they didn't know he was being lit from below is beyond stupid.

As for the photographer, it was very unprofessional to brag about lighting him so poorly on purpose. Though if that's how she sees Mr. McCain then it should be reflected in her work. The Atlantic surely did not have to purchase these photos if they were so displeased with them. The McCain campaign surely could have hired someone to do a better job, it's not as if the photographer would have been the only one to see these images before the issue went to press.

[TruepatriotinRI]

Looks to me like a picture of a pilot who would drop bombs on innocent women and children.

[robbor]

The Atlantic is scapegoating the photographer. The images would not have been published had the editorial staff not accepted them. period.

[ginsushark]

That type of lighting is called "Frankenstien" lighting. MCCain constantly brags that he has more scars than Frankenstien. Artists riff off that sort of thing - If he doesnt believe he can be compared to Frankenstien, he shouldnt say it.

The magazine should give that photographer more work. theyre creative. Editorialize it one way or another, spin it one way or another - thats nice photography.

[poco767c]

If they didn't like it why did they use the picture?