You know, you guys have been going about this all wrong. Some of my smarter opponents, in response to this, have said:
"So, they dazzled up the photo? So what? It was for the cover of the magazine, and they wanted to make it as striking as possible. There was nothing forensic involved. Nobody was being killed at the time. So, what difference does it make? It's something that goes on all the time, and everyone is aware of it."
I don't happen to agree with that opinion. Although the photo is not forensic, it is highly historical. For goodness sake, JFK was going to get his head blown off in just a few minutes. I say that makes it a very historical photo, and I don't think historical photos should be messed with.
Nevertheless, I don't say they don't have a point, and with that, it comes down to a difference of opinion, and you pretty much have to leave it at that.
But no, not you guys. You have to fight every last thing. Never give up anything, eh? Fight everything on principle. Refuse to even grant that they may have enhanced colors using advanced technology. It was 2013, and they had all this digital technology at their disposal to enhance photos, but they did NOTHING. Didn't even brighten a single color.
And all you're doing is endorsing my position, that messing with historical photos is NOT OK. Thanks for the support.