Photo Manipulation and Ethics

The main points this website was making was that the ethics of photo manipulation is changing and there are so many things to pay attention to, like how you are editing a photo. The author states several examples about what the photographer did and what happened, and one of the photographers edited a photo to make the background look like it did in real life, but since it was changed so extremely they got fired because it went against the companies photo ethics. The author also stated that the ethics are still undecided, when it comes to universally (A). 

The philosophy of New York Times and Washington Post regarding manipulation is that it shouldn't have to be original unless labeled so. They also stated that if it is journalism, which is where you shoot things as it is than you should edit it as little as you you can, but it is okay to manipulate an image if something fails you -camera screws up- and you want it to look like how the scene looked from memory. They do state that if you are trying to shoot something as it looks then you should edit it as little as possible, so that it is correct and true (B).

I think if all you're doing to the photo is making it look better, for example, if you were to change the clarity, exposure, or saturation then it is okay to photoshop it. I don't think it's okay to make someone look different or put someone in a different situation unless it is necessary or the person lets you. I think that should only be applied to those in the media business (C).

I think this photo is the most unethical because it is making the governor look like a different person then who she is. The people who distributed this photo didn't get consent from the governor and the photo could hurt her political career (D).

This photo originally had a brownish-gray background, but the photographer stated that he edited it to look like the original scene, but his camera failed him. I think that this is the least unethical photo because he stated the scene originally looked like how it did after editing. I think the manipulation, if what he said was true, is ethical and understandable because it is a good photo and the scene must have looked as good (E).

Website