Artist of RAYGUN's tear doesn't get the controversy. Time mag photoshops LOTS of covers.

[UTUSN]

The 2nd link is to ROMENESKO's site where the item was REprinted. It's in the "Media" section, left side. Couldn't find the original source's link. It is in its entirety here anyway.


*******QUOTE*******

http://debbie.popphoto.com/deardebbie/2007/03/ronald_reagan_c.html

Ronald Reagan Cries a Big Fat Tear: A Q&A With Illustrator Tim O'Brien

.... Tim: They wanted it to read from a distance. It has to be an obvious hit. I don’t quite get all the controversy. I’ve been reading the media blogs all day and it’s funny that people think it’s pulling the wool over people’s eyes. I think it has more to do with people being afraid of seeing a man cry. His son Michael Reagan was on Fox saying his dad would never cry.

Me: Isn’t it an accepted fact that photo-illustrations are a normal part of the language of magazine covers these days?

Tim: I’ve been doing painted illustrations for years, and photo-illustrations are part of the mix now. Time does a lot in-house; they’re very capable. It’s nice that they actually give me a hand. I mostly do illustrative painting. I’m trained as a trompe l'oeil painter. This thing took me a half hour. I spent 12 hours doing another cover that didn’t run -- an oil painting. This one was after they switched gears. Photoshop’s very fast, but it’s not my calling card.

To read more of the story behind this cover, go to Tim O’Brien’s blog, and check out more of his paintings and illustrations here.



http://www.obscurestore.com/

Time Gets Crafty With Weepy Reagan Cover

TALE OF TEARS Reagan, TimeIs Time hoping a little controversy will draw attention to its redesign? The first new-look issue, on newsstands tomorrow, features what appears to be a photo of Ronald Reagan with a fat tear sliding down his cheek, illustrating the cover story, "How the Right Went Wrong." A somewhat cryptic credit in small type on the (revamped!) table of contents describes the image this way: "Photograph by David Hume Kennerly. Tear by Tim O'Brien." Nowhere does it specifically state that the cover is a photo illustration—in other words, that it's Photoshopped.

The use of a striking but fabricated image is consistent with the vision laid out by new managing editor Rick Stengel, who has said he wants Time to be more like The Economist—the British newsweekly that often features humorous photo illustrations on its cover. Still, one wonders: Is the wording of the credit enough to make its provenance clear to unsophisticated readers? And, equally important, how will the conservative acolytes who worship Reagan as a demigod feel about seeing a faked image of their hero used for a story criticizing the movement he championed?

UPDATE: A Time spokesperson responds with a statement: Time regularly runs conceptual covers, as we did last week with the "Verdict on Cheney" cover, depicting the vice president standing under storm clouds." (That image was far less subtle in its artificiality, but fair point.) "This week's cover image is clearly credited on the table of contents page, naming both the photographer of the Reagan photo and the illustrator of the tear."

********UNQUOTE*******

[jobycom]

1. Reagan might cry that there are still non-white people in America

Other than that, acting like that utter failure has some reason to think the current Republicans are worse than him is ludicrous. Same peas, same pod. Same results as when Reagan did it all. The only difference is that the mood of the nation wouldn't let Reagan overtly invade Nicaragua or Honduras or Libya, otherwise he'd have gotten us into the same type of mess as W.

In twenty years we are going to be trying to tell people how bad W really was, and the media will be painting tears on his wise face over whatever idiot Republican is failing then.