While our photographs are amature shots, what sets these photos that look amature apart from you and I?

Personally, I don't find much of a difference between amateur photo's like that and professional. Sure, some people may have stylistic differences, but hey, a photo is a photo in the end. It all just comes down to personal preference.


Would a ficticious documentary be much different or would the same rules apply as a non-fiction one?

Ever seen "Waiting for Guffman"? Hilarious fictitious documentary, and I've seen a few other films like that, just can't think of any names off the top of my head. No rules apply when it comes to fiction, but there should be at least some artistic integrity when it comes to non-fiction documentaries.

It seems as if the author was saying that you do not have to script out what people are saying, simply let them say what they want and get the excitement in their voice, etc. and then later you can make it into what you want to make it. Do you think it is possible for the documentary maker to be completely unobjectionable?

Of course it isn't. They set out to make one specific documentary about something, and by god, they are going to do what they set out to do, be it to bad mouth President Bush by editing out everything good that was said about them, or by not even using the interviews that praised him. It's all whatever the filmmaker wants.