if we can shift the grounds of the debate so that we recognise all photography is an interpretation and representation, we can think about the issues of manipulation in terms of their impact on what we want certain images to do, the work they perform for us, and the effects we desire them to have. To my mind that would be a much more productive discussion.
(via What are the current standards relating to the manipulation of photographs? A discussion at the World Press Photo Awards Days 2014)
This is a very interesting post. I’m typically skeptical about strict rules about photographic manipulation. The examples Campbell shows really drive home the point about how silly some of the rules are. I really like where he takes this though. An unmanipulated photograph can most certainly lie and be unethical and lack integrity. It’s usually not the manipulations which determine any of that.