Ethics

A photograph is an honest moment captured by the shutter (7). The power of the photograph is the representation of reality and truth. For some mediums the representation of the truth in photos is not necessary, but there lies the difference between the ethical and the unethical manipulation.

The ubiquity of photo manipulation programs like Adobe Photoshop has allowed a wider variety of users, mediums and purposes. And the simplicity of the interface and quickness of tampering effects has led to more and more digital manipulation for many different intentions.

How come it seems technology always brings up the “hard” questions in society? While the technology may not have any ethics, the user’s ethics are now tested by the endless possibilities of what technology can do. In fact, digital alterations is only a new way of processing images, but does not require another set of ethical standards (7).

Photography is no longer a fixed depiction of information. The malleability of photos must be matched with a paradigm shift in the society. There cannot be any more image-naiveté because every image, especially photos, have a story teller behind it telling his/her story of the event or object that is represented by the photograph.

From copy right issues to deception of the consumer, manipulation are easy to make, but are becoming harder and hard to detect. And that seems to be the key: insinuating reality by any form of manipulation.

Digital vs. Darkroom
What is the difference between a digital manipulation and a darkroom manipulation? Conceptually, ethically and practically the image is still enhanced and altered with the same intentions: to make a pleasing aesthetic out of a natural photo (8).

Sampling and Ownership
Source photographs are taken from all places (mainly the World Wide Web) and a new image is compiled from the original(s). In most cases, the original photographer is not the photo manipulator. In other words, the manipulator does not have the rights to the original photo(s). However, most manipulations create an utterly new and unique photograph; the original may not even be recognizable. Like the ethics of sound sampling, plagiarism comes into question: is taking a sampling of another’s work truly plagiarism?

Regardless of being plagiarism, now a manipulated photo has to have an owner. Is the unique piece a rightfully the property of the manipulator or does it belong to the photographer of the original (11)? Ultimately, if the photograph is used in a publication, who is sited and how is the original image traced back? These are all questions that need to be determined with the manipulation.

Photos as a Right and as History
Changes to a photograph are a representation of the artist behind the manipulation. Hence, when a viewer looks at an altered photograph he/she is getting an interpretation or an opinion of what the photograph was supposed to represent. As consumers of the news we have a right to receives truthful information and use that information to make informed decisions (7). The purposes of the news and our freedom of speech are to obtain factual information to make educated choices in a free society. Not only do current decisions depend on current information, but historical documentation and accurate citations affect current choices as well. Hence, there is an obligation to preserve the credibility of these photos for future generations (7), otherwise there is a false creation of history. Currently many photos are manipulated and will not be documented in a truthful fashion.

Cropping and Overlapping
Cropping alone is a very provocative and powerful tool that was never considered unethical previously. However, it is a way of telling the story with a different point of view. Someone or something that used to be in the picture can be erased with a simple shift in the boundaries of the photograph. Overlapping, is also against the code of ethics for the Webster University Journal, because it could potentially alter the information displayed by the photograph (5). And these alterations are layout alteration, not so much digital technology alterations.

Intent and Context
What is being achieved or trying to be achieved by the alterations made? The purpose of the manipulation(s) can range from attempting to simulate reality, deceiving the reader to think it is reality, entertaining the audience, or to show off skills. There are ethical intentions and unethical objectives. While determining the intent of the manipulation, the medium for which the photograph is to be used needs to be considered as well. Is it for a Christmas card, a class project, or a credible media source (4)? What difference in meaning is made by the alteration in the capacity in which it will be used? The context of the photograph and associated information are important too: “Context becomes a problem when we find digitally altered photos in reputable publications” (7).

Solution
There are many possible solutions to make sure the reader/audience is aware of altered images. Fred Ritchin, former New York Times Magazine photo editor, has created an icon to be placed on published photographs to indicate digital alterations. This icon is a tiny crossed-out lens (3); however, it was not well perceived because of the attitude that all media is manipulated depending on the author’s point of view. Hence, the icon was never distributed.

An image that is staged or fundamentally altered can be referred to a photo illustration, rather than a photograph (5).

Consumers can also alter their frame of reference. There is a balance between believing every source and everything that is printed and refusing to trust any news source (4). Some photos need to be taken with a “grain of salt.”

There is a fine line separating positive photo alterations and the abuse of the technology allowing for deceitfulness. It comes down to the intent and context of the photograph. If the medium requires a falsified image, alterations are the correct answer. However, if the intent is to represent the truth, any edit in the photo is a comment from that person who changed the truth, regardless of how “small, quick or easy” the manipulation might have been.

Bottom Line
The society, as well as media editors, needs to realize that this world is not perfect and hence neither will the photographs. However, there seems to be a strong need throughout society to make everything perfect. The sky in California always has to be bright and sunny, the model on the magazine does not need any freckles, dimples, or beauty marks, and the photograph must fit in that layout exactly. If those things are not accomplished, photo manipulation becomes the quick and easy solution. However, this technology was never intended for the purposes of perfection or deception.

Manipulation tools are just that: TOOLS. They have no ethics and can often times be misused for other purposes (8). Though an extreme example, guns are tools that are often misused. People have ethics and if they cannot use the tool for its primary purpose, then it becomes unethical. In the case of photo manipulation, deception (whether motivated or unintended) is unethical. Period, end of story, bottom line.