Should we post-process?

But not even the Photoshop user manual (bury your nose in the middle and breath deeply) smells anything like those chemicals . . . oh the aroma of . . . D76, was it? and fixer . . . forgotten the chemical name now. Not forgetting Pot Ferri (Potassium ferricyanide) if that's the right spelling, used as a bleach . . . I think.

This might be relevant.

Article

Mike

This is what I agree with:

"photographs must be altered in one way or another in order to have a chance to represent the reality that I perceive."

And this is what I don't:

“In fact I clone, change the colors, alter the contrast, and even remove houses that look ugly in the middle of a pristine wilderness."

I don't want somebody to show me a photograph and say: "this is Yellowstone National Park" when in fact, it isn't.

G

Well George I suppose as a fan of the Tracey Emin reality school of art you would feel that way

I think I'm with the author. In my reality that house wasn't there. We can subconsciously blank out something we don't want to see when viewing anything.

Mike

I'm not saying it shouldn't be done at all. But if somebody declares that the photograph represents something when it doesn't, that's where I get unhappy.

G

Agreed. You shouldn't misrepresent an image.

It all depends on context. A record shot of something should by definition be accurate, but a creative landscape could be open to free interpretation.