Photographers Are on a Mission to Fix Wikipedia's Famously Bad Celebrity Portraits (404media.co)
- Reference: 0176670331
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/03/10/2333206/photographers-are-on-a-mission-to-fix-wikipedias-famously-bad-celebrity-portraits
- Source link: https://www.404media.co/photographers-are-on-a-mission-to-fix-wikipedias-famously-bad-celebrity-portraits/
> This portrait problem stems from Wikipedia's [4]mission to provide free reliable information. All media on the site must be openly licensed, so that anyone can use it free of charge. That, in turn, means that most photos of notable people on the site are of [5]notably poor quality . "No professional photographers ever have their photos on Wikipedia, because they want to make money from the photos," said Jay Dixit, a writing professor and amateur Wikipedia photographer. "It's actually the norm that most celebrities have poor photos on Wikipedia, if they have photos at all. It's just some civilian at an airport being like, 'Oh my god, it's Pete Davidson,' click with an iPhone."
>
> Dixit is part of a team of volunteer photographers, called WikiPortraits, that's trying to fix that problem. "It's been in the back of our minds for quite a while now," said Kevin Payravi, one of WikiPortraits' cofounders. "Last year, finally, we decided to make this a reality, and we got a couple of credentials for Sundance 2024 [a major film festival]. We sent a couple photographers there, we set up a portrait studio, and that was our first organized effort here in the U.S. to take good quality photos of people for Wikipedia."
>
> Since last January, WikiPortraits photographers have covered around 10 global festivals and award ceremonies, and taken nearly 5,000 freely-licensed photos of celebrity attendees. And the celebrity attendees are often quite excited about it. [...] WikiPortraits photos are currently used on Wikipedia articles in over 120 languages, and they're viewed up to 80 million times per month from those pages alone. In January, for example, Payravi said that over 1,500 WikiPortraits photos were used on articles that collectively received 140 million views. Many WikiPortraits photos have also been used by a variety of news outlets around the world, including CNN Brasil, Times of Israel, and multiple non-English-language smaller news organizations.
"[N]ot being an official news or photo agency means WikiPortraits sometimes faces problems getting media credentials to cover events," notes 404 Media. "Funding poses another main challenge."
"Photographers must already own a professional-quality camera, and usually have to cover the cost of getting to events and at least part of their lodging. Although WikiPortraits sometimes receives rapid grants from the Wikimedia Foundation and private donors to cover costs, Payravi said he still likes to run a 'tight ship.'"
[1] https://www.wikiportraits.org/
[2] https://www.instagram.com/badwikiphotos/
[3] https://www.404media.co/photographers-are-on-a-mission-to-fix-wikipedias-famously-bad-celebrity-portraits/
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Purpose?ref=404media.co
[5] https://www.instagram.com/badwikiphotos/?ref=404media.co
Nope! (Score:1)
I can't make myself give a hoot about celebs. If they paid well, *maybe* I'd help them with that, but I'd never do it if it cost me anything. Scientists, any truly altruistic human, if I could help I would. Celebs, they'd be paying me plenty even to change their tire on the road. I'd be more likely to stop and moon them.
How do you edit a wiki? (Score:2, Troll)
I propose a counter campaign to replace every celebrity image with the worst one publicly available.
Re: (Score:2)
[1]Edit Wars [wikipedia.org] are hardly a new thing on Wikipedia, the [2]popularity contest for factoids [npr.org] that prohibits actual facts.
They're well equipped to protect their sacred cows.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lamest_edit_wars
[2] https://www.npr.org/2012/10/03/162203092/wikipedia-politicizes-landmark-historical-event
Quite the Opposite (Score:2)
> Wikipedia's issue of featuring outdated and unflattering portraits
I (and probably many of the subjects) have often wished WP could just use older, unreproducible, much more flattering pictures of now 60+ (or even 40+) celebs from the heyday of their careers instead the often up-to-date, hi-res (with problem-free copyright) images snapped by at a convention or in public.
Doesn't make sense (Score:2)
What celebrity doesn't have publicity head shots available? Most likely produced as a work for hire by a professional photographer. Just pick a flattering one out and send it to Wikipedia.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure they would cheerfully use such photos if the celebrities would release them under an appropriate Creative Commons license.
How many celebs do you know of who will do (or have done) that?
(And their best shots often belong to the studios, being publicity shots for specific films or TV shows. And they are not going to release their IP under a CC license.)
And Angry White Men On A Mission To Prevent That (Score:2)
How dare these so called photographers try editing those pages!
MIsses the Point (Score:2)
The biggest problem with Wikipedia has always been a lack of good images to illustrate and elucidate the article's subject. Especially bad is maps. Of all the pictures that are lacking in Wikipedia, celebrity photos are the absolute lowest priority.
Reasons (Score:2)
Interesting. I always assumed it was because Wikipedia wanted to show pictures of people as they are, not some brushed-up publicity photo that looks nothing like the actual person.