We have removed links in this thread because some pointed to discourse that we felt was not appropriate. The comments themselves, of course,remain: GBU Editor

it’s clear to anyone knowledgeable in photography that these images are not doctored, and to anyone with a vague background in the physics of fire that it is in fact not staged.

nothing in the room is burned except the ashes and debris on the floor. the charcoal on the door protected the room from the heat and fire (carbon is often used in heat protection). the only burned items are located near to the windows (glass known to radiate heat effectively)

so there’s the question of the ashes on the floor.
in the photographs there is an abundance of light that is consistant with that of natural light, both in it’s shading properties and in it’s color temurature.

the ashes on the floor are obviously from the roof, which has burned and fallen in knocking the doll off it’s perch and onto it’s ashes.

simple, real and scientificly plausable explanation.

as far as I’m concerned this photograph is indeed honest and effective coverage

And well… This little case starting to looks like a scandal. And this discussion doesn’t look like discussion any more… Sorry, but in my humble opinion you started to be arrogant and insult each other in many kind of ways.

Cheers

Your method of testing challenged photo? In house editors –not experts in fire sciences–looking at other photographs by the same photographer of the same scene. This is hardly a serious investigation. ”

you are implying here something, you are implying “staged photo” you are implying “fake photo” of course, now that the word Slander appears you use the “not me” card, please… we are intelligent, even if we don’t appear in Forbes we have more than 3 fingers of forehead…

I have seen fire scenes where thing get blown up in the air be it the expansive wave of things exploding or the tremors of weak structures due to fire, they fly and they fall but aren’t touched by flames, they may land in places where flames where already suffocated by the lack of oxygen… happy now????.. nop…you will not be happy, there are 3,000,000 variables in which something will happen that is inexplicable, yet you won’t be happy,not until you get your hits elevated by thousands of visitors in your website… you will try to get free publicity for your web site and your name, dirty PR moves… whenever you have solid proofs accuse… if not -again- you are slandering

Now you even post the link to your site, if you are paying big fat checks to the PR people that suggested this move, well they will be happy, even when they have won a place in hell for doing staining the name of an honest photographer.

And it is safe to post here, you just expect people will follow your rules, must of us will try to maintain some education, but some others won’t as said before, if you post your email address you are bound to have this kind of response, even more when you are trying to falsely accuse an honest photographer, welcome to web 2.0 and planet earth in case you didn’t know how the world is.

And no we aren’t doing any damage to Mario, you have been perfectly doing that role, just to get more hits on your website, by doing slander! SHAME ON YOU!

This is evidence that you knew insider information from Mario and Reuters on Oct 31st– three days before I posted on Nov 3rd.

Sexist and porn references aimed at me and my daughter on your two blogs are not “paranoia.” You actively encourage others to attack. You sent me a private, nasty email yourself; yet you write ” i know nothing of private emails.”

Readers don’t be fooled. If its not safe for me and my daughter to post comments here. Is it safe for you?

dA’s time and date stamp is utc i believe. i read what you wrote in your comment which said, “In fact, by email Reuters has just informed me the doll and related photos case “is closed” and that this GBU blog allows me to express my or others opinions.”

you really love a good conspiracy don’t you?

the world and the media is not out to get you ms. shearer.

This debate existed right here well before I got involved so I think its interesting that you and others (friends of Mario) focus on me. Here goes my opinion:

I can believe that someone dropped the doll into the scene or the doll somehow fell from a shelf and landed there. I do not believe this doll was in the position as shown in the photo during a raging fire as evidenced by its pristine condition. That is my opinion but I want to serve the public’s interest to find out more. What does the family have to say? What do experts have to say? I will report all that I find.

Ed, do you believe the doll was untouched by the heat and flames surrounding it? If yes, why?

All that Mario the photographer or Reuters editors have to say is “we don’t know how the doll got there; but here is the photo” and I would be satisfied with that. The problem is, that is not what they are saying. This is not a “miracle doll.”

Most interesting of all is that Chris knew–BEFORE I DID–as shown from the dateS and timeS of his comments –that Reuters was not going to provide Mario’s doll photos in high resolution to me.

How did Chris have this advance knowledge that he shared with the rest of Mario’s friends? After all, this is private, insider, employee/employer information from Mario’s working relationship with Reuters about this public dispute?

There is only one answer I can think of: Mario told Chris Weeks who shares it with all the other Mario friends on his blog.

This surly is evidence that Mario, the Reuters professional photographer is, embarrassingly for Reuters,in cahoots with his friends’ campaign to flame me and my daughter–as Chris Weeks openly admits on his blog.

Frankly, I think Mario’s friends are doing much more damage to their friend’s career than my questions. Who wants a guy working for them who sends out flame throwers to attack critics of their work. Very troubling if Reuters turns a blind eye to this employee problem.

Much like the dog chasing its tail the outcome is meaningless (other than the damage done, and disrespect shown to a professional photographer that is).

Yeah web 2.0 allows anyone to express their opinion and IMHO is a sad thing when people like you without proof make a scandal about “staged” photos, it is way easy for you to draw attention to yourself in a morbid way by doing slander here, so be it, is this some kind of twisted way to get PR to your website???, as said before I hope you really, really get sued for Slander.

What guarantee do we have that you and “your” experts won’t tamper the evidence???? hardly I would believe you have any ethics by reading how you have accused someone without any proof.

Also what experience do YOU have on photojournalism?? -this is the part I will surely love to read the most ’cause I already know you have none-

And finally please don’t “dear” me, I don’t know you at all, and I don’t want someone like you call me “dear”.

Of course the GBU has closed the matter, cause your allegations are ridiculous, your poor experience on photography and your greed to get attention to your name and your website makes you go on false accusations.

Where did I say the photo is fraudulent? Nowhere. I have said many times: I learned that others questioned the photo right here on this blog. You may be satisfied with Reuters saying “the photo is fine” with no supporting evidence provided–I am not. The other GBU posting provides my additional response to your comment.

I have asked Reuters for the address of the house and I have asked whether or not they had permission to enter and photograph this private house. They have refused to answer. So I continue seeking it on my own.

In fact, by email Reuters has just informed me the doll and related photos case “is closed” and that this GBU blog allows me to express my or others opinions.

After Reuters their recent major scandal of staged and altered photos, this stonewall is not going to help the public’s belief in their credibility.