Again, that is a distinction without a difference. A photographer certainly can compensate for skin tone versus how the final result will be rendering, for instance, by using lighting, provided the scene is under the photographer's control. (Edit: see my comment further upthread where I pasted in a link about this very thing.) But, some of those methods have the disadvantage that by color correcting for skin tone, one automatically distorts the color in other parts of the image.

This is less true in digital photography, given the level of control over post processing one has. However, the end result is the same: it take more effort to produce a faithful photo of a black person than a white person, for reasons completely out of the control of either the photographer or the subject.

That is all that is meant by the statement I made. Indeed, it is literally the entire content of the statement I made. I would defy you to quote where I blamed black people, or even implied there was even anything any black person could do about this unfortunate reality.

Edit: Incidentally, literally everything I've said here about the difficulties of faithfully photographing people applies to darker skinned people of any ethnicity, such as Indians or Afro-Arab people. None of this is racist in the sense that it implies anyone is lesser than anyone else, just that that's the way current technology works.

pmiller2's intent was clear, he was obviously commenting on limitations of camera technology, not suggesting that black people intent nor choose(?!?) to be hard to photograph. dstick's response is maliciously uncharitable at best.

Thank you, as well, for recognizing what I was saying, and that, while I made statements involving race, there was no malicious racism behind any of it.