Real or Fake

Photo Manipulation 

The first photo you see above is obviously fake but what about the one under it. The top one was made in photoshop the bottom photo was made in camera with a long shutter speed no editing required. These are examples of photo manipulation, a way for photographers to create art with their skills of technology. This topic on if photographers should or shouldn't manipulate images has been talked about for years. Rules that are possible on how much a photographer should "fake" an image have been discussed but none have been set in place. 

As a photographer, the one that took both images above I believe that there shouldn't be rules on what a photographer can create. Are there rules on artist on what they can draw, paint or sculpt? No, society needs to realize that not everything you see is reality, this is true in everything not just photography. Why should photographers have a limitation and not film makers. Most of the TV, movies, and advertising people see are fake and edited. Some photographers use photoshop to create an image that is from their imagination, an example being land floating above a canyon(Image1). Others use skills in a camera to manipulate light, where no photoshop was used(Image2).  Photography its self is manipulation not just the crazy edits you see online. A photographer uses different setting in a camera to manipulate the light to their personal liking. Making it where no manipulation could happen would completly wipe out photography in general. A question that has been asked around is "how strict can the rules be." Are photographers just banned from creating art in photoshop or are they banned from creating art in camera? Each rule gets rid artistic freedom. Not knowing how strict the rules should be is just another reason why they shouldn't be in place.

Matt Brandon asks "Were photographers ever meant to capture only reality?"(Brandon2012). I think this is a great question because a camera was created to capture a moment but as anything it starts to evolve. Matt Brandon used and example of a carpenter. "carpenters are meant only to build houses. Of course, this is silly. Carpenters can do anything with their trade and craft from building a house to a beautiful wooden statue or a gorgeous boat to sail the ocean. Traditionally, carpenters are meant to build things out of wood. The only limitation is that it needs to be wood. To relegate carpenters to do one thing would be stifling"(Brandon2012). The only limitation a photographer has is that their art has to use a camera.So why shouldn't they be able to create a image of land floating just as a carpenter is able to bulid a statue. They both use their mediums.The photographer uses the same camera that captures real moments as the carpenter uses the same wood that builds a house. Art is created to show the view of the world and the situations in it so why should someone be limited on how they do just that. No matter the medium used there should be no limits put on art.  

http://thedigitaltrekker.com/2012/04/photography-whats-real-whats-not-and-does-it-matter
https://luminous-landscape.com/the-very-old-debate-of-image-manipulation/
Images: http://www.ashbyphotography.net/fullscreen-page/comp-iy4ujjzq/5220cd5e-6684-4530-b8df-02a99397bb65/1/%3Fi%3D1%26p%3Dlm54d%26s%3Dstyle-iyyr8skf (my own website for my images)
https://aphotoeditor.com/2009/09/18/is-photo-manipulation-bad-for-photography/