Re: The Ethics of Image-Making in Science

GTO wrote:
This is correct. In the past, people could perform magic with silver-based materials. But a lot of skills were needed to modify a silver-based image without making it look too obvious. Today, with tools like Photoshop, an image can be manipulated so easily that many grad students under time pressure could (but hopefully do not!) "fix up" an image for publication.

I believe that digital camera makers must incorporate the production of a digitally singned RAW image, which preserves the RAW information. Then this material must be presented to the editor together with the images for publication. The referees must then decide if the images are acceptable for publication in a scientific journal.

Remember, a picture speaks a thousand words. At least, the editor must ensure that the picture is most likely telling the truth. By this immense flood of scientific papers, we cannot assume that we only deal with "reputable" scientists. "Vertrauen ist gut, Kontroller ist besser!" seems to be more prudent. Too much depends on a new lucrative research grant, a condition that might lead to temptation.

Gregor


"jacques jedwab" <jjedwab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:jjedwab-2204051715000001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In article <hUZ9e.1815$Xb4.1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "GTO"
<gregor_o@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


If you have access to the magazine called Nature, you might find the
following article worth reading:

Helen Pearson, CSI: cell biology, Nature Vol 434, p. 952-953 (2005).

The abstract of this paper:
"Digital photography and image-manipulation SW allow biologists to tweak
their data as never before. But there's a fine line between acceptable
enhancements and scientific misconduct."

I think it is time that also the people in charge of the Nikon Small World
Competition employ some of the measures mentioned in this article. The
danger of using Photoshop to extensively "tweak" an image is all around us.

Gregor 

Faked photographs on silver-based materials are as old as photography.

Data "enhancement", "manipulation", "statistical selection and
highlighting" are not new. Petrologists (and biologists?) exchange their
grass-root microscopical slides since long ago, and will continue to do so
in the future. A reputable scientist will not (or very seldom) put his/her
carrier at risk, when knowing that a colleague or a reviewer could ask for
the original material.

J.J.

If you do much proccessing to the images the raw images should be made avalible. Just at discarted data point should be published and marked.

Gordon
.

Relevant Pages

  • News Story - Scientists closer to invisibility cloak
    ... Scientists closer to invisibility cloak ... materials that redirect light around the objects. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Scientists develop invisibility cloak
    ... Scientists closer to developing invisibility cloak ... Scientists say they are a step closer to developing materials that ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Scientists develop invisibility cloak
    ... Scientists closer to developing invisibility cloak ... Scientists say they are a step closer to developing materials that ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Ao ta`ng hi`nh
    ... Scientists closing in on invisibility cloak ... Using artificially engineered materials to redirect light around ... WASHINGTON - Scientists say they are a step closer to developing ...
    (soc.culture.vietnamese)
  • The Invisible Man (or Woman) Just Might Be YOU! (NBC)
    ... WASHINGTON - Scientists say they are a step closer to developing ... materials that could render people and objects invisible. ... The findings, by scientists at the University of California, Berkeley, ... the National Science Foundation's Nano-Scale Science and Engineering ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)