View source for Photograph manipulation

{{Short description|Transformation or alteration of a photograph}}
{{about|the uses, cultural impact, and ethical concerns of image manipulation|the mechanics of altering images|Image editing|the restoration of physical photographs and documents using digital techniques|Digital photograph restoration}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=February 2015}}
[[File:Episode after Battle of Zonnebeke 1918 Hurley.jpg|thumb| upright=1.5| Australian photographer [[Frank Hurley]] formed this [[Compositing|composite]] photograph from three original negatives of [[World War&nbsp;I]] in Belgium.<ref name=Mashable_Hurley>{{cite news |last1=Arbuckle |first1=Alex Q. |title=One man's record of the war to end all wars |url=https://mashable.com/feature/frank-hurley-on-the-western-front |work=Mashable |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210507014841/https://mashable.com/feature/frank-hurley-on-the-western-front/ |archive-date=7 May 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref> Hurley argued with his superiors over the ethics of compositing photos, arguing that war was conducted on such a vast scale that it was impossible to capture the essence of it in a single negative.<ref name=LibraryNSW_Hurley>{{cite web |last= Wishart |first=Alison |title=Truth and photography |url=https://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/stories/frank-hurleys-world-war-i-photography/truth-and-photography |website=sl.nw.gov.au |publisher=State Library of New South Wales |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220320143543/https://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/stories/frank-hurleys-world-war-i-photography/truth-and-photography |archive-date=20 March 2022 |date=2017 |url-status=live |quote=None but those who have endeavoured can realise the insurmountable difficulties of portraying a modern battle by the camera. To include the event on a single negative, I have tried and tried, but the results are hopeless. Now, if negatives are taken of all the separate incidents in the action and combined, some idea may then be gained of what a modern battle looks like.}}</ref>]]

'''Photograph manipulation''' or '''photograph alteration''' is the [[image editing|modification]] of an otherwise genuine [[photograph]]. Some photograph manipulations are considered to be skillful artwork, while others are considered to be unethical practices, especially when used to deceive. Motives for manipulating photographs include political [[propaganda]], altering the appearance of a subject (both for better and for worse), entertainment and humor.

Depending on the application and intent, some photograph manipulations are considered an [[art form]] because they involve creation of unique images and in some instances, signature expressions of art by photographic artists. For example, [[Ansel Adams]] used [[Burning and dodging|darkroom exposure techniques]] to darken and lighten photographs. Other techniques include retouching using ink or paint, [[airbrush]]ing, [[double exposure]], piecing photos or [[Negative (photography)|negatives]] together in the darkroom, and scratching [[instant film]]s. Software for digital image manipulation ranges from casual to professional skillsets. One of these, [[Adobe Photoshop]], has led to the use of the term '''''photoshop''''', meaning to digitally edit an image with any program.

== History and techniques ==
[[File:Retouche-set.jpg |thumb |upright=1.2|Early retouching tools: [[gouache]] paint, [[kneaded eraser]]s, [[Charcoal (art)|charcoal sticks]], and an [[airbrush]], the latter giving rise to the phrase "airbrushed from history"]]
{{multiple image |total_width=550
| image1=1852 Calhoun - Lincoln - photo manipulation.jpg |caption1= [[Abraham Lincoln]]'s head superimposed on a print of [[John C. Calhoun]] was not discovered for almost a century, when photojournalist [[Stefan Lorant]] noticed Lincoln's mole was on the wrong side of his face.<ref name=NatGeo_20240312>{{cite magazine |last1=Yang |first1=Allie |title=It's harder than ever to identify a manipulated photo. Here's where to start. |url=https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/article/digitally-manipulated-ai-altered-photo-images |magazine=National Geographic |date=12 March 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240313031414/https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/article/digitally-manipulated-ai-altered-photo-images |archive-date=13 March 2024 |url-status=live }}</ref>
| image2=Ulysses S. Grant at City Point.jpg |caption2= [[Ulysses S. Grant|General Grant]] at [[City Point, Virginia|City Point]] is a composite of three different photographs.
}}
Photo manipulation dates back to some of the earliest photographs captured on [[ambrotype|glass]] and [[tintype|tin plates]] during the 19th century. The practice began not long after the creation of the first photograph (1825) by [[Joseph Nicéphore Niépce]] who developed [[heliography]] and made the first photographic print from a photoengraved printing plate.<ref name="BBC">{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1885093.stm |work=BBC News |date=21 March 2002 |title=World's oldest photo sold to library |quote=The image of an engraving depicting a man leading a horse was made in 1825 by Nicephore Niepce, who invented a technique known as heliogravure. |access-date=2011-11-17}}</ref><ref name=Farid>{{cite web |url=http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~beki/cs4001/history.pdf/ |title=Photo Tampering Throughout History |first=Hany |last=Farid |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150908155915/http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~beki/cs4001/history.pdf |archive-date=September 8, 2015 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> Traditional photographic prints can be altered using various methods and techniques that involve manipulation directly to the print, such as retouching with ink, paint, [[airbrush]]ing, or scratching [[Polaroid film|Polaroids]] during developing ([[Polaroid art]]).<ref name=Scratch>{{cite web |url=http://www.pola-art.de/technique/ |title=How to manipulate SX-70? |work=Polaroid SX-70 Art |publisher=Skylab Portfolio |editor=Klaus Wolfer |access-date=February 2, 2016 |archive-date=February 13, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160213080250/http://www.pola-art.de/technique/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> Negatives can be manipulated while still in the camera using double-exposure techniques, or in the [[darkroom]] by piecing photos or negatives together. Some darkroom manipulations involved techniques such as bleaching to artfully lighten or totally wash out parts of the photograph, hand coloring for aesthetic purposes, or mimicking a fine art painting.<ref name="Warren">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=31VsBgAAQBAJ&q=Darkroom+manipulations+are+traditional+art&pg=PA1007 |title=Encyclopedia of Twentieth-Century Photography, 3-Volume Set |publisher=Routledge |author=Lynne Warren |year=2006 |pages=1007 |isbn=978-1-135-20536-2}}</ref>

In the early 19th century, photography and the technology that made it possible were rather crude and cumbersome. While the equipment and technology progressed over time, it was not until the late 20th century that photography evolved into the digital realm. In the 20th century, digital retouching became available with [[Quantel]] computers running [[Quantel Paintbox|Paintbox]] in professional environments,<ref name="Sasso">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Q-I2M80f7KwC&q=digital+retouching+with+Quantel+computers&pg=PA124 |title=Abduzeedo Inspiration Guide for Designers |author=Fabio Sasso |publisher=Pearson Education |page=124 |isbn=978-0-13-268472-9 |date=July 2011}}</ref> which, alongside other contemporary packages, were effectively replaced in the market by editing software for [[Graphic image developer|graphic imaging]], such as [[Adobe Photoshop]] and [[GIMP]]. At the onset, digital photography was considered by some to be a radical new approach and was initially rejected by photographers because of its substandard quality.<ref name="Peres">{{cite book |last=Peres |first=Michael |title=The Focal Encyclopedia of Photography, Fourth Edition |year=2007 |publisher=Focal Press; 4 edition |isbn=978-0-240-80740-9 |page=Preface, 24 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VYyldcYfq3MC&pg=PR23 |access-date=January 30, 2016}}</ref> The transition from film to digital has been an ongoing process, although much progress was made in the early 21st century as a result of innovation that has greatly improved digital image quality while reducing the bulk and weight of cameras and equipment.<ref name=Adobe>{{cite web |url=https://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/phscs2ip_filmtodig.pdf |publisher=Adobe Systems Incorporated |title=Making The Transition From Film To Digital |author-first=Michael |author-last=Reichmann |author-link=Michael Reichmann |date=2006}}</ref>

[[Ansel Adams]] used [[Burning and dodging|darkroom exposure techniques]], burning (darkening) and dodging (lightening) a photograph.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://whitherthebook.wordpress.com/2013/02/27/ansel-adams-and-photography-before-photoshop/ |title=Ansel Adams, and Photography Before Photoshop |author=Jack Dziamba |date=February 27, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite interview |title=Artbeat |date=November 29, 2012 |access-date=January 30, 2016 |author=Mia Fineman |interviewer=Tom Legro |work=PBS Newshour |publisher=WPBT2 |location=South Florida |url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/slide-show-what-did-we-do-before-photoshop}}</ref>

Whereas manipulating photographs with tools such as Photoshop and GIMP is generally skill-intensive and time-consuming, the 21st century has seen the arrival of image editing software powered by advanced algorithms which allow complex transformations to be mostly automated.<ref name="DigitalBeauty">{{cite journal |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266378457 |journal=IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine |title=Digital Beauty |last1=Corcoran |first1=Peter |date=October 2014 |doi=10.1109/MCE.2014.2338573 |s2cid=3024848}}</ref> For example, [[beauty filters]] which smooth skin tone and create more visually pleasing facial proportions (for example, by enlarging a subject's eyes) are available within a number of widely used social media apps such as [[Instagram]] and [[TikTok]], and can be applied in real-time to live video. Such features are also available in dedicated image editing mobile applications like [[Facetune]]. Some, such as [[FaceApp]] use [[deep-learning]] algorithms to automate complex, content-aware transformations, such as changing the age or gender of the subject of a photo, or modifying their facial expression.<ref name="TheVerge2017a">{{cite web |last=Vincent |first=James |title=This app uses neural networks to put a smile on anybody's face |website=[[The Verge]] |date=27 May 2019 |access-date=13 June 2017 |url=https://www.theverge.com/tldr/2017/1/27/14412814/faceapp-neural-networks-ai-smile-image-manipulation}}</ref>

The term ''[[deepfake]]'' was coined in 2017 to refer to real images and videos generated with deep-learning techniques. The alterations can be created for entertainment purposes, or more nefarious purposes such as spreading [[disinformation]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Bellemare |first=Andrea |date=July 5, 2019 |title=The real 'fake news': how to spot misinformation and disinformation online |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/fake-news-misinformation-online-1.5196865 |access-date=2022-03-29 |website=Canadian Broadcast Corporation}}</ref> Fraudulent creations can be used to conduct [[Defamation|malicious attacks]], political gains, [[financial crime]], or [[fraud]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=How deepfakes could impact the 2019 Canadian election |url=https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/federal-election-2019/how-deepfakes-could-impact-the-2019-canadian-election-1.4586847 |last=Bogart |first=Nicole |date=2019-09-10 |publisher=CTV News |work=Federal Election 2019 |language=en |access-date=2020-04-30 |archive-date=November 25, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231125195302/https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/federal-election-2019/how-deepfakes-could-impact-the-2019-canadian-election-1.4586847 |url-status=dead }}</ref> More recently, deep fakes superimposing the faces of celebrities and other persons onto those of pornographic performers for the purpose of creating pornographic material has become prevalent; [[deepfake pornography]] has been criticized due to issues with lack of consent.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Mahdawi |first=Arwa |date=2023-04-01 |title=Nonconsensual deep fake porn is an emergency that is ruining lives |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/apr/01/ai-deepfake-porn-fake-images |access-date=2023-04-03 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

Raw [[Astrophotography|astronomical images]] of [[Astronomical object|celestial objects]] are usually generated from data provided by complex digital cameras.<ref name=PopSci_20240418/> Raw images include [[Binary image|binary (black-and-white)]] or [[grayscale]] data generated in response to [[infrared]] or [[ultraviolet]] or other energy lying outside the [[light|visible light]] [[Electromagnetic spectrum|spectrum]]—requiring people to make technical decisions for how to transform the raw digital data into colorized pictures for human viewing.<ref name=PopSci_20240418/> For example, in images from the [[James Webb Space Telescope]] and [[Hubble Space Telescope]], the usual transformation is to use blue for the shortest wavelengths, red for the longest wavelengths, and green for intermediate wavelengths.<ref name=PopSci_20240418/> Both scientific accuracy and visual appeal contribute to the decisions, for both enabling accurate analysis by scientists and providing visual interest for the public.<ref name=PopSci_20240418/> Also, science visualization specialists sometimes stack images together, stitch observations from different instruments, enhance contrast, and remove [[Artifact (error)|artifacts]].<ref name=PopSci_20240418>{{cite magazine |last1=Lewis |first1=Briley |title=Where do all those colors in space telescope images come from? |url=https://www.popsci.com/science/telescope-images/ |magazine=Popular Science |date=18 April 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240422085910/https://www.popsci.com/science/telescope-images/ |archive-date=22 April 2024 |url-status=live }}</ref>

== Political and ethical issues ==
[[File:Hitler in the Odeonsplatz Munich 2 August 1914 by Heinrich Hoffmann.jpg|thumb|upright=1.75|A photograph by [[Heinrich Hoffmann (photographer)|Heinrich Hoffmann]] was manipulated to show [[Adolf Hitler]] celebrating the outbreak of World War&nbsp;I in Munich.<ref>[http://www.smh.com.au/world/famous-hitler-photograph-declared-a-fake-20101019-16sfv.html "Famous Hitler photograph declared a fake"] ''[[Sydney Morning Herald]]'' (20 October 2010). Accessed 22 March 2022.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last= Rosenbaum |first=Ron |url=https://archive.org/details/secretpartsoffor00rose/page/495/ |title=The Secret Parts of Fortune: Three Decades of Intense Investigations and Edgy Enthusiasms |publisher=Random House |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-375-50338-2 |page=495 |author-link=Ron Rosenbaum |url-access=limited}}</ref>]]

Photo manipulation has been used to deceive or persuade viewers or improve storytelling and self-expression.<ref name="Rotman">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qQE0OLSIXsEC&q=photograph+has+an+inherent+verisimilitude&pg=PA96 |title=Becoming Beside Ourselves: The Alphabet, Ghosts, and Distributed Human Being |publisher=Duke University Press |author=Rotman, Brian |year=2008 |pages=96–97 |isbn=978-0-8223-4183-3}}</ref> As early as the [[American Civil War]], photographs were published as engravings based on more than one negative.<ref name="Palmquist">{{cite book |title=Pioneer Photographers from the Mississippi to the Continental Divide: A Biographical Dictionary, 1839–1865 |publisher=Stanford University Press |author=Peter E. Palmquist, Thomas R. Kailbourn |year=2005 |pages=55 |isbn=978-0-8047-4057-9}}</ref> In 1860, a photograph of the politician John Calhoun was manipulated and his body was used in another photograph with the head of the president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. This photo credits itself as the first manipulated photo.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://iisjoa.org/sites/default/files/iisjoa/2017/PDF/11.%20Jitendra%20Sharma%20&%20Rohita%20Sharma.pdf |title=Analysis of Key Photo Manipulation Cases and their Impact on Photography |last=Sharma |first=Jitendra & Rohita |date=2017}}</ref>

[[Joseph Stalin]] made use of photo retouching for propaganda purposes.<ref>{{cite book |last=King |first=D. |year=1997 |title=The Commissar Vanishes: the falsification of Photographs and Art in Stalin's Russia |publisher=Metropolitan Books |location=New York |isbn=0-8050-5294-1}}</ref> On May 5, 1920, his predecessor [[Vladimir Lenin]] held a speech for Soviet troops that [[Leon Trotsky]] attended. Stalin had Trotsky retouched out of a photograph showing Trotsky in attendance.<ref name="Ammann">{{cite book |first=Daniel |last=Ammann |title=[[The King of Oil: The Secret Lives of Marc Rich]] |publisher=Macmillan |year=2009 |pages=228 |isbn=978-1-4299-8685-4}}</ref> In a well-known case of ''[[damnatio memoriae]]'' ("condemnation of memory") image manipulation, [[NKVD]] leader [[Nikolai Yezhov]], after his execution in 1940, was removed from an official press photo where he was pictured with Stalin; historians subsequently nicknaming him the "Vanishing Commissar".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newseum.org/berlinwall/commissar_vanishes/vanishes.htm |title="The Commissar Vanishes" in The Vanishing Commissar |author=The Newseum |date=Sep 1, 1999 |access-date=September 30, 2012}}</ref> Such [[censorship of images in the Soviet Union]] was common.

The pioneer among journalists distorting photographic images for news value was [[Bernarr Macfadden]]: in the mid-1920s, his "[[composograph]]" process involved reenacting real news events with costumed [[body double]]s and then photographing the dramatized scenes—then pasting faces of the real news-personalities (gathered from unrelated photos) onto his staged images.{{Citation needed|date=February 2021}}

A photograph by [[Adolf Hitler]]'s official photographer [[Heinrich Hoffmann (photographer)|Heinrich Hoffmann]] was manipulated to show Hitler celebrating the outbreak of [[World War I|World War&nbsp;I]] in Munich.<ref>[http://www.smh.com.au/world/famous-hitler-photograph-declared-a-fake-20101019-16sfv.html "Famous Hitler photograph declared a fake"] ''[[Sydney Morning Herald]]'' (20 October 2010). Accessed 22 March 2022.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Rosenbaum |first=Ron |author-link=Ron Rosenbaum |url=https://archive.org/details/secretpartsoffor00rose/page/495/ |title=The Secret Parts of Fortune: Three Decades of Intense Investigations and Edgy Enthusiasms |publisher=Random House |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-375-50338-2 |page=495 |url-access=limited}}</ref> In the 1930s, artist [[John Heartfield]] used a type of photo manipulation known as the [[photomontage]] to critique [[propaganda in Nazi Germany|Nazi propaganda]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Political Art. Official John Heartfield Exhibition. Integrity. Courage. Genius |url=https://www.johnheartfield.com/John-Heartfield-Exhibition/ |access-date=2023-02-19 |website=John Heartfield Exhibition |language=en-US}}</ref>

Some ethical theories have been applied to image manipulation. During a panel on the topic of ethics in image manipulation<ref>{{cite conference |url=http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1179176 |title=Ethics in image manipulation |conference=International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques |year=2006 |isbn=1-59593-364-6 |first1=Kathryn |last1=Carlson |first2=Brian |last2=DeLevie |first3=Aude |last3=Oliva |doi=10.1145/1179171.1179176 |publisher=[[Association for Computing Machinery|ACM]] |book-title=ACM SIGGRAPH 2006|url-access=subscription }}</ref> [[Aude Oliva]] theorized that categorical shifts are necessary in order for an edited image to be viewed as a manipulation. In ''Image Act Theory'',<ref>{{cite conference |last=Reynolds |first=C. J. |title=Image Act Theory |conference=Seventh International Conference of Computer Ethics |date=July 12–14, 2007 |url=http://www.k2.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/members/carson/papers/reynolds_cepe2007.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080528064429/http://www.k2.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/members/carson/papers/reynolds_cepe2007.pdf |archive-date=May 28, 2008 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> Carson Reynolds extended [[speech act]] theory by applying it to photo editing and image manipulations. In "How to Do Things with Pictures",<ref>{{cite book |chapter-url=http://www.stanford.edu/class/history34q/readings/Mitchell/MitchellHow.html |chapter=How to Do Things with Pictures |first=William John |last=Mitchell |author-link=William J. Mitchell |title=The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era |publisher=MIT Press |year=1994}}</ref> [[William J. Mitchell]] details the long history of photo manipulation and discusses it critically.

Photo manipulation is largely considered a useful tool in modern political campaigning and photo manipulations are oftentimes used to amplify political messages and undermine political opponents.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Harwell |first=Drew |date=2020-01-14 |title=Doctored images have become a fact of life for political campaigns. When they're disproved, believers 'just don't care.' |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/01/14/doctored-political-images/ |access-date=2024-03-31 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> For example, on January 6, 2020, US Rep. [[Paul Gosar]] (R-Ariz.) tweeted a photo of US President [[Barack Obama]] shaking hands with Iranian President [[Hassan Rouhani]], with the caption "The world is a better place without these guys in power."<ref name="The Washington Post">{{Cite news |last=Thebeault |first=Reis |date=January 6, 2020 |title=A GOP congressman tweeted a fake image of Obama with the Iranian President. They never met. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/06/gop-congressman-tweeted-fake-image-obama-with-iranian-president-they-never-met/ |access-date=2023-04-03 |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> It was pointed out that this meeting never took place and in reality was a doctored photo of a meeting between President Obama and Indian Prime Minister [[Manmohan Singh]].<ref name="The Washington Post"/> Gosar was criticized for attempting to spread disinformation. The photo had also been previously used in a 2015 advert for Senator [[Ron Johnson]].<ref>{{Cite news |last=Qiu |first=Linda |date=2020-01-06 |title=Republican Congressman Shares Fake Image of Obama and Iranian President |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/06/us/politics/paul-gosar-obama-iran.html |access-date=2023-04-03 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

In 2023, the organizers of Dublin Pride were accused of "intentionally doctoring photos" to push "propaganda" when they posted an altered image from a 1983 protest, in which the slogan ''"Trans rights are human rights"'' was added to a sign carried by a demonstrator.<ref name="Pride1983">{{Cite web|url=https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/dublin-pride-removes-altered-photo-of-protest-from-its-website-after-complaints/a1068338702.html|title=Dublin Pride removes altered photo of protest from its website after complaints|website=www.independent.ie|date=August 13, 2023 |access-date=17 March 2024|archive-date=14 August 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230814012102/https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/dublin-pride-removes-altered-photo-of-protest-from-its-website-after-complaints/a1068338702.html|url-status=live}}</ref> A spokesman for Dublin Pride defended the change, saying that the "practice of altering iconic images for campaigns is a common practice".<ref name="Pride1983" /> The altered image was ultimately removed from the Dublin Pride website.<ref name="Pride1983" />

{{ multiple image | total_width=500
| image1= Wright First Flight 1903Dec17 (full restore 115).jpg |caption1= 1903 achromatic photo of the ''[[Wright Flyer]]'' 
| image2= Wright First Flight 1903Dec17 (full restore 115, colorized).jpg  |caption2= A 2021 [[Hand-colouring of photographs|colorized]] version
}}

[[File:Pillars of Creation (NIRCam and MIRI Composite Image) (pillarsofcreation composite).jpeg|thumb|upright=1.4|The [[James Webb Space Telescope]] returns data representing [[infrared]] light, which is invisible to humans. This composite representation of the ''[[Pillars of Creation]]'' was artificially generated by [[False color|converting]] the infrared data into the visible-color spectrum.]]

=== Use in journalism ===
{{See also|Photojournalism#Ethical, legal, and social considerations}}

A notable incident of controversial photo manipulation occurred over a photograph that was altered to fit the vertical orientation of a 1982 ''[[National Geographic (magazine)|National Geographic]]'' magazine cover. The altered image made two [[Egyptian pyramids]] appear closer together than they actually were in the original photograph.<ref name=NYT>{{cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1984/11/04/magazine/photography-s-new-bag-of-tricks.html?pagewanted=4 |publisher=The New York Times Company |date=November 4, 1984 |author=Fred Ritchin |title=Photography's New Bag Of Tricks |access-date=January 6, 2016}}</ref> The incident triggered a debate about the appropriateness of falsifying an image,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Moscaritolo |first=Angela |date=July 5, 2016 |title=National Geographic Tackles Photo Manipulation |url=https://www.pcmag.com/news/national-geographic-tackles-photo-manipulation |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240712225937/https://www.pcmag.com/news/national-geographic-tackles-photo-manipulation |archive-date=July 12, 2024 |access-date=May 2, 2025 |website=PCMag |language=en}}</ref> and raised questions regarding the magazine's credibility. Shortly after the incident, Tom Kennedy, director of photography for ''[[National Geographic]]'' stated, "We no longer use that technology to manipulate elements in a photo simply to achieve a more compelling graphic effect. We regarded that afterward as a mistake, and we wouldn't repeat that mistake today."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sharma |first=Jitendra |last2=Sharma |first2=Rohita |title=Analysis of Key Photo Manipulation Cases and their Impact on Photography |url=https://iisjoa.org/sites/default/files/iisjoa/2017/PDF/11.%20Jitendra%20Sharma%20&%20Rohita%20Sharma.pdf |url-status=live |journal=IIS University Journal of Arts |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=88-99 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250311204454/https://iisjoa.org/sites/default/files/iisjoa/2017/PDF/11.%20Jitendra%20Sharma%20&%20Rohita%20Sharma.pdf |archive-date=March 11, 2025 |via=IIS University Journal of Arts}}</ref>

There are other incidents of questionable photo manipulation in journalism. One such incident occurred in early 2005 after [[Martha Stewart]] was released from prison. ''[[Newsweek]]'' used a photograph of Stewart's face on the body of a much slimmer woman for their cover, suggesting that Stewart had lost weight while in prison.<ref name= NYT2005>{{cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/03/business/media/martha-stewart-gets-new-body-in-newsweek.html?_r=0 |title=Martha Stewart Gets New Body In Newsweek |work=[[The New York Times]] |author=Jonathan D. Glater |date=March 3, 2005 |access-date=January 6, 2015}}</ref> Speaking about the incident in an interview, Lynn Staley, assistant managing editor at ''Newsweek'' said, "The piece that we commissioned was intended to show Martha as she would be, not necessarily as she is." Staley also explained that ''Newsweek'' disclosed on page 3 that the cover image of Martha Stewart was a composite.<ref name=NYT2005 />

Image manipulation software has affected the level of trust many viewers once had in the aphorism "the camera never lies".<ref name=IntlNYT2004>{{cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/11/technology/the-camera-never-lies-but-the-software-can.html |title=The Camera Never Lies, But The Software Can |publisher=The New York Times Company |author=Katie Hefner |date=March 11, 2004}}</ref> Images may be manipulated for fun, aesthetic reasons, or to improve the appearance of a subject<ref name=Photo>{{cite book |last=Kitchin |first=Rob |title=Code/Space: Software and Everyday Life |year=2011 |publisher=The MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-04248-2 |chapter=6 |page=120 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZHez2BXgIeQC&pg=PA120}}</ref> but not all image manipulation is innocuous, as evidenced by the [[Kerry Fonda 2004 election photo controversy]]. The image in question was a fraudulent composite image of [[John Kerry]] taken on June 13, 1971, and [[Jane Fonda]] taken in August 1972 sharing the same platform at a 1971 antiwar rally, the latter of which carried a fake [[Associated Press]] credit with the intent to change the public's perspective of reality.<ref name="IntlNYT2004" />

There is a growing body of writings devoted to the ethical use of digital editing in [[photojournalism]]. In the [[United States]], for example, the [[National Press Photographers Association]] (NPPA) established a Code of Ethics which promotes the accuracy of published images, advising that photographers "do not manipulate images [...] that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://nppa.org/code_of_ethics |title=NPPA Code of Ethics |date=January 28, 2017 |publisher=[[National Press Photographers Association]]}}</ref> Infringements of the Code are taken very seriously, especially regarding digital alteration of published photographs, as evidenced by a case in which [[Pulitzer Prize]]-nominated photographer [[Allan Detrich]] resigned his post following the revelation that a number of his photographs had been manipulated.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003571795 |title=Blade Editor: Detrich Submitted 79 Altered Photos This Year |work=[[Photo District News]] |date=April 15, 2007 |first=Daryl |last=Lang}}</ref>

In 2010, a Ukrainian photographer{{Snd}}Stepan Rudik, winner of the 3rd prize story in Sports Features{{Snd}}was disqualified due to violation of the rules of the [[World Press Photo of the Year|World Press Photo]] contest. "After requesting [[Raw image format|RAW-files]] of the series from him, it became clear that an element had been removed from one of the original photographs."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Announcement of disqualification |url=http://www.worldpressphoto.org/news/2010-03-03/announcement-disqualification |website=World Press Photo |access-date=2016-01-22 }}{{Dead link|date=May 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> As of 2015, up to 20%<ref>{{Cite web |title=World Press Photo Organizer: 20% of Finalists Disqualified |url=https://time.com/3706626/world-press-photo-processing-manipulation-disqualified/ |website=[[Time (magazine)|Time]] |date=February 12, 2015 |access-date=2016-01-22}}</ref> of World Press Photo entries that made it to the penultimate round of the contest were disqualified after they were found to have been manipulated or post-processed with rules violations.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What counts as manipulation? |url=http://www.worldpressphoto.org/activities/photo-contest/verification-process/what-counts-as-manipulation |website=World Press Photo |access-date=2016-01-22 }}{{Dead link|date=May 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

== Retouching human subjects ==
A common form of photographic manipulation, particularly in advertising, fashion, boudoir, portrait, and glamour photography, involves edits intended to enhance the appearance of the subject. Common transformations include smoothing skin texture, erasing scars, pimples, and other skin blemishes, slimming the subject's body, and erasing wrinkles and folds. Commentators have raised concerns that such practices may lead to unrealistic expectations and negative body image among the audience.

=== Use in fashion ===
The photo manipulation industry has often been accused of promoting or inciting a distorted and unrealistic image of {{nowrap|self{{hsp}}{{mdash}}}}{{hsp}}most specifically in younger people.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Professional Photo Editing Services For E-commerce photos |url=https://www.fixanyphoto.com/ |access-date=2024-12-30 |website=www.fixanyphoto.com |language=en-US}}</ref> The world of [[glamour photography]] is one specific industry that has been heavily involved with the use of photo manipulation (what many consider to be a concerning element as many people look up to celebrities in search of embodying the 'ideal figure').<ref>{{Cite web |title=Professional Photo Editing Services For E-commerce photos |url=https://www.fixanyphoto.com/ |access-date=2024-12-30 |website=www.fixanyphoto.com |language=en-US}}</ref> Manipulation of a photo to alter a model's appearance can be used to change features such as skin complexion, hair color, body shape, and other features. Many of the alterations to skin involve removing blemishes through the use of features included within popular image editing programs which are designed for just such purposes. Photo editors may also alter the color of hair to remove roots or add shine. Additionally, the model's teeth and eyes may be made to look whiter than they are in reality. [[Cosmetics|Makeup]] and [[body piercing|piercings]] can even be edited into pictures to look as though the model was wearing them when the photo was taken. Through photo editing, the appearance of a model may be drastically changed to mask imperfections.<ref>Metzmacher, Dirk. "Smashing Magazine." Smashing Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. April 16, 2014.</ref>

In an article entitled "Confessions of a Retoucher: how the modeling industry is harming women", a professional retoucher who has worked for mega-fashion brands shares the industry's secrets.<ref name="Cage">{{Cite web |url=https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/beauty/confessions-of-a-retoucher-how-the-modelling-industry-is-harming-women-20171006-gyvqf2.html |title=Confessions of a retoucher: how the modeling industry is harming women |last=Cage |first=Carolyn |date=2017-10-06 |website=The Sydney Morning Herald |language=en |access-date=2018-10-30}}</ref> Along with fixing imperfections like skin wrinkles and smoothing features, the size of the model is manipulated by either adding or subtracting visible weight. Reverse retouching is just as common as making models skinnier, "distorting the bodies of very thin models to make them appear more robust in a process called reverse retouching. It is almost worse than making someone slimmer because the image claims you can be at an unhealthy weight but still look healthy. In reality, you can't, you have to Photoshop it".<ref name="Cage" /> Reverse retouching includes eliminating shadows from protruding bones, adding flesh over body parts, color correcting, and removing hair generated for warmth from extreme weight loss. Professionals are saying that if an image is not labeled "not retouched", then the public can assume that photograph has been modified.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/how-retouched-photos-impact-our-mental-health-2018-3 |first1=Caitlin |last1=Flynn |agency=SheKnows |date=Mar 30, 2018 |title=Here's how retouched photos impact our mental health |work=Business Insider |access-date=2018-10-30}}</ref> As the fashion industry continues to use photos that have been manipulated to idealize body types, there is a need for education about how unreal and unhealthy these images are and the negative implications they are promoting.

A digital manipulation expert, who edited and altered a lot of images for the fashion industry and wants to remain private, says it is normal to digitally manipulate a photograph of a model to make them appear thinner, regardless of actual weight. Generally, photographs are edited to remove the appearance of up to {{Convert|10|kilogram}}. However, in the past 20 years,{{When|date=February 2021}} the practice has changed, as more celebrities are on social media and the public is now more aware of their actual appearances; it is likely that significant alterations would be noticed.{{Citation needed|date=February 2021}} The retoucher notes that the industry's goal is to make significant income in advertising and that the unrealistic ideals cycle will continue as they have to maintain this.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/beauty/photoshop-shock-insider-reveals-fashion-industry-image-editing-practices-20140924-10l97y.html |title=Photoshop shock: Insider reveals fashion industry image editing practices |last=Clun |first=Rachel |date=2014-09-24 |website=The Sydney Morning Herald |language=en |access-date=2020-04-04}}</ref>

Starting in 2012, [[Seventeen (American magazine)|''Seventeen'' magazine]] said they intended to no longer manipulate photos of their models. The decision was made after a 14-year-old girl, Julia Bluhm, petitioned that the magazine use a minimum of one unaltered photo in each of their spread per issue. The petition received over 84,000 signatures.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Amanda Oliver |title=4 Companies That Refuse to Photoshop—And Why That Matters For All Genders |url=https://groundswell.org/4-companies-that-refuse-to-photoshop-and-why-that-matters-for-all-genders/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150305001614/https://groundswell.org/4-companies-that-refuse-to-photoshop-and-why-that-matters-for-all-genders/ |archive-date=2015-03-05 |access-date=2020-04-04 |website=Groundswell |language=en}}</ref>

=== On social media ===
Social media apps such as [[Snapchat]], [[Instagram]], and [[TikTok]] enable users to manipulate photos using the back or front camera, applying pre-made filters to enhance the quality of the picture, distort themselves, or add creative elements such as text, coloring or stickers. Filters provided on social media platforms are made by social media companies or are [[user-generated content]]. Photo editing techniques include the addition of polls, GIFs, music, countdowns, donations, and links.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Mueller |first1=Marie Elisabeth |url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9781003275251/social-media-storytelling-marie-elisabeth-mueller-devadas-rajaram |title=Social Media Storytelling |last2=Rajaram |first2=Devadas |date=2022 |doi=10.4324/9781003275251|isbn=9781003275251 |s2cid=249563030 }}</ref> Influencers use filters to grow engagement and boost follower activity, in order to be seen as unique,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bakhshi |first1=Saeideh |last2=Shamma |first2=David |last3=Kennedy |first3=Lyndon |last4=Gilbert |first4=Eric |date=2015 |title=Why We Filter Our Photos and How It Impacts Engagement |url=https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14622 |journal=Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media |language=en |volume=9 |issue=1 |pages=12–21 |doi=10.1609/icwsm.v9i1.14622 |issn=2334-0770|doi-access=free }}</ref> creative, or fascinating. Meta reported that over 600 million people have used an AR effect on Facebook or Instagram.<ref name="newportinstitute.com">{{Cite web |date=2022-03-05 |title=Do You Use a Filter Every Time You Post? |url=https://www.newportinstitute.com/resources/co-occurring-disorders/filters-mental-health/ |access-date=2023-03-19 |website=Newport Institute |language=en-US}}</ref>

[[Mobile phone application]]s such as [[Facetune]] allow users to modify their own personal images.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Media |first=Caroline Knorr, Common Sense |title=How girls use social media to build up, break down self-image |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/12/health/girls-social-media-self-image-partner/index.html |access-date=2018-10-30}}</ref> Social media users, especially younger people, are thus exposed to an extreme amount of manipulated imagery presenting unrealistic, unachievable body ideals.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite news |last=Solon |first=Olivia |date=2018-03-09 |title=FaceTune is conquering Instagram – but does it take airbrushing too far? |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/mar/09/facetune-photoshopping-app-instagram-body-image-debate |access-date=2020-04-04 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> For example, social media platforms such as TikTok have include filters that create an illusion of physical attributes, such as the "skinny filter" and the "perfect skin filter".<ref name="newportinstitute.com"/> Part of the idea of perfection on social media comes from Japanese culture and the word "[[kawaii]]", which translates to an overall aspect of cuteness; exerting fragile, girly, and childlike emotions. Kawaii-enhanced photos present a perception of perfection in a photo booth setting. This notion catalyzed the first selfie phone camera by [[Kyocera]] in 1999, which led to the posting of selfies during the beginnings of [[Myspace|MySpace]] in the early 2000s.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Wong |first=Kristin |title=The Power of Kawaii: How Cute, Squishy Things Influence Us |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/story/the-power-of-kawaii/ |access-date=2023-03-19 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Beauty filters are changing the way young girls see themselves |url=https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/04/02/1021635/beauty-filters-young-girls-augmented-reality-social-media/ |access-date=2023-03-19 |website=MIT Technology Review |language=en}}</ref>

=== In advertising ===
Photo manipulation has been used in advertisements for television commercials and magazines to make their products or the person look better and more appealing than how they look in reality.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://edu.gcfglobal.org/en/digital-media-literacy/the-problem-with-photo-manipulation/1/ |title=Digital Media Literacy: The Problem with Photo Manipulation |website=GCFGlobal.org |language=en |access-date=2020-04-04}}</ref> Some tricks that are used with photo manipulation for advertising are: fake grill marks with eye-liner, using white glue instead of milk, or using deodorant to make vegetables look glossy.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.trulydeeply.com.au/2015/11/food-photography-and-manipulation-in-advertising-why-do-we-accept-knowingly-being-lied-to/ |title=Food photography and manipulation in advertising: Why do we accept knowingly being lied to? |date=2015-11-19 |website=Truly Deeply – Brand Agency Melbourne |language=en-AU |access-date=2020-04-04}}{{Dead Link|date=May 2025}}</ref>

=== Celebrity opposition ===
Photo manipulation has triggered negative responses from both viewers and celebrities. This has led to celebrities refusing to have their photos retouched in support of the [[American Medical Association]] that has decided that "[we] must stop exposing impressionable children and teenagers to advertisements portraying models with body types only attainable with the help of photo editing software".<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |url=http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/fashion/ama-takes-stand-photoshop-medical-association-altering-contributes-unrealistic-expectations-article-1.126921#ixzz1QUW2THCf |title=Photoshop contributes to unrealistic expectations of appropriate body image: AMA |website=NY Daily News |access-date=2016-04-25}}</ref> These include [[Keira Knightley]], [[Brad Pitt]], [[Andy Roddick]], [[Jessica Simpson]], [[Lady Gaga]], and [[Zendaya]].

Brad Pitt had a photographer, [[Chuck Close]], take photos of him that emphasized his flaws. Chuck Close is known for his photos that emphasize the skin flaws of an individual. Pitt did so in an effort to speak out against media using image manipulation software and manipulating celebrities' photos in an attempt to hide their flaws. [[Kate Winslet]] spoke out against photo manipulation in media after ''[[GQ]]'' magazine altered her body, making it look unnaturally thin.<ref>{{cite web |title=Keep It Real Challenge: Photoshop's Impact on Body Image |date=29 June 2012 |access-date=19 April 2015 |url=http://info.umkc.edu/womenc/2012/06/29/keep-it-real-challenge-photoshops-impact-on-body-image/ |website=info.umkc.edu}}</ref> 42-year-old [[Cate Blanchett]] appeared on the cover of [[1843 (magazine)|''Intelligent Life'']]'s 2012 March/April issue, makeup-free and without digital retouching for the first time.<ref>{{cite web |last=Roberts |first=Soraya |title=Cate Blanchett goes without digital enhancement on the cover of Intelligent Life |date=March 22, 2012 |url=http://ca.omg.yahoo.com/blogs/the-juice-celeb-news/cate-blanchett-goes-without-digital-enhancement-cover-intelligent-154517034.html |publisher=The Juice |access-date=March 22, 2012}}</ref>

In April 2010, [[Britney Spears]] agreed to release "un-airbrushed images of herself next to the digitally altered ones". The fundamental motive behind her move was to "highlight the pressure exerted on women to look perfect".<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/beauty-news/pics-before-after-britney-s-airburshed-candie-s-ads-182755 |title=SEE PICS! Before & After: Britney Spears' airbrushed Candie's ads |last=Claire |first=Marie |date=2010-04-14 |website=Marie Claire |language=en |access-date=2020-04-23}}</ref> In 2014, Hungarian pop vocalist and songwriter [[Boggie]] produced two music videos that achieved global attention for its stance on [[Whitewashing (beauty)|whitewashing]] in the beauty industry: the #1 [[Association of Hungarian Record Companies|MAHASZ]] chart hit "Parfüm" (Hungarian version) and "Nouveau Parfum" (French version) from her self-titled album ''Boggie'', which reached two [[Billboard charts|''Billboard'' charts]] (#3 Jazz Album, #17 World Music Album).<ref>{{Cite web |title=Single Top 40 slágerlista - Hivatalos magyar slágerlisták |url=https://slagerlistak.hu/single-track-top-40-lista/2014/4 |access-date=2023-02-19 |website=slagerlistak.hu}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=It's Boggie for Hungary! |url=https://eurovision.tv/story/it-s-boggie-for-hungary |website=Eurovision |access-date=7 July 2019 |date=28 February 2015}}</ref> In the videos, the artist is shown singing as she is extensively retouched in real-time, ending with a side-by-side comparison of her natural and manipulated images as the song fades out.<ref name="metro">{{cite web |date=January 22, 2014 |title=Boggie Photoshop music video: Singer uses Nouveau Parfum promo to show how digital trickery can transform you &#124; Metro News |url=http://metro.co.uk/2014/01/22/singer-uses-new-music-video-to-show-how-drastically-photoshop-can-transform-you-4273268/ |access-date=1 February 2014 |publisher=metro.co.uk}}</ref>

=== Corporate opposition ===
Some companies have begun to speak out against photo manipulation in advertising their products. [[Dove (toiletries)|Dove]] created the Dove Self-Esteem Fund and the [[Dove Campaign for Real Beauty]] to build confidence in young women, emphasizing "real beauty", or unretouched photographs, in the media.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Evolution Video – Dove Self Esteem Project |website=selfesteem.dove.us |date=2 June 2013 |access-date=1 May 2015 |url=http://selfesteem.dove.us/Articles/Video/Evolution_video_how_images_of_beauty_are_manipulated_by_the_media.aspx |archive-date=September 9, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170909052844/http://selfesteem.dove.us/Articles/Video/Evolution_video_how_images_of_beauty_are_manipulated_by_the_media.aspx |url-status=dead }}</ref> Clothing retailer [[Aerie (clothing retailer)|Aerie]]'s<!--- per [[MOS:TMSTYLE]] name is not to be stylized here ---> campaign [[Aerie (clothing retailer)#Aerie Real|#AerieREAL]] emphasizes that their clothes are for everyone and that their advertisements have not been retouched in any way, saying "The real you is sexy."<ref>{{cite web |title=Aerie for American Eagle |access-date=1 May 2015 |url=http://www.ae.com/featured-aeriereal/aerie/s-cat/6890055 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170129204635/https://www.ae.com/featured-aeriereal/aerie/s-cat/6890055 |archive-date=January 29, 2017 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Krupnick |first=Ellie |title=Aerie's Unretouched Ads 'Challenge Supermodel Standards' For Young Women |newspaper=The Huffington Post |date=17 January 2014 |access-date=1 May 2015 |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/aerie-unretouched-ads-photos_n_4618139.html}}</ref>

The American Medical Association stated that it is opposed to the use of photo manipulation. Dr. McAneny{{Who|date=February 2021}} made a statement that altering models to such extremes creates unrealistic expectations in children and teenagers regarding body image. He also said that the practice of digitally altering the weight of models in photographs should be stopped, so that children and teenagers are not exposed to body types that cannot be attained in reality. The American Medical Association as a whole adopted a policy to work with advertisers to work on setting up guidelines for advertisements to try to limit how much digital image manipulation is used. The goal of this policy is to limit the number of unrealistic expectations for body image in advertisements.<ref>{{cite web |title=AMA Adopts New Policies at Annual Meeting |date=21 June 2011 |website=ama-assn.org |access-date=19 April 2015 |url=http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/news/a11-new-policies.page}}</ref>

=== Government opposition ===
Governments are exerting pressure on advertisers, and are starting to ban photos that are too airbrushed and edited. In the United Kingdom, the [[Advertising Standards Authority (United Kingdom)|Advertising Standards Authority]] has banned an advertisement by [[Lancôme]] featuring [[Julia Roberts]] for being misleading, stating that the flawless skin seen in the photo was too good to be true.<ref>{{cite web |last=Zhang |first=Michael |title=Julia Roberts Makeup Ads Banned in UK for Too Much Photoshop |date=July 27, 2011 |url=http://www.petapixel.com/2011/07/27/julia-roberts-makeup-ads-banned-in-uk-for-too-much-photoshop/ |publisher=PetaPixel |access-date=July 27, 2011}}</ref> The US is also moving in the direction of banning excessive photo manipulation where a [[CoverGirl]] model's ad was banned because it had exaggerated effects, leading to a misleading representation of the product.<ref>{{cite web |last=Anthony |first=Sebastian |title=US watchdog bans photoshopping in cosmetics ads |url=http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/109375-us-bans-photoshop-use-in-cosmetics-ads |access-date=December 16, 2011}}</ref>

In 2015, France proceeded to pass a law that battles against the use of unrealistic body images and anorexia in the fashion industry. This includes modeling and photography. The models now have to show they are healthy and have a BMI of over 18 through a note from their doctor. Employers breaking this law will be fined and can serve a jail sentence of up to six months. When a creator of a photograph does not disclose that the picture is edited or retouched, no matter how small the edit, they may also receive a fine or 30% of the costs of what they used to create their ad.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://petapixel.com/2015/12/22/france-bans-too-thin-fashion-models-demands-that-photoshopping-be-labeled/ |title=France Bans Too-Thin Fashion Models, Demands That Photoshopping Be Labeled |website=petapixel.com |date=December 22, 2015 |access-date=2020-04-04}}</ref>

In 2021, [[Norway]] enacted legislation making it a requirement to label digital manipulations of the bodies of persons when depicted in advertising. Failure to do so is punishable by a fine.<ref name="Onibada 2021">{{cite web |last=Onibada |first=Ade |title=Influencers In Norway Will Legally Have To Disclose Their Photoshopped Images |website=[[BuzzFeed News]] |date=2021-07-01 |url=https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/adeonibada/influencers-norway-law-filter-photoshop |access-date=2021-07-03}}</ref>

=== Support ===
Some editors of magazine companies do not view manipulating their [[cover model]]s as an issue. In an interview with the editor of the French magazine ''[[Marie Claire]]'', she stated that their readers are not idiots and that they can tell when a model has been retouched. Also, some who support photo manipulation in the media state that the altered photographs are not the issue, but that it is the expectations that viewers have that they fail to meet, such as wanting to have the same body as a celebrity on the cover of their favorite magazine.<ref>{{cite web |title=In Defense of Photoshop: Why Retouching Isn't As Evil As Everyone Thinks |work=The Cut |date=29 August 2010 |access-date=19 April 2015 |url=http://nymag.com/thecut/2010/08/photoshop_retouching.html}}</ref>

=== Opinion polling ===
A survey done by the United Kingdom-based fashion store [[New Look (company)|New Look]] showed that 90% of the individuals surveyed would prefer seeing a wider variety of body shapes in media. This would involve them wanting to see cover models that are not all thin, but some with more curves than others. The survey also talked about how readers view the use of photo manipulation. One statistic stated that 15% of the readers believed that the cover images are accurate depictions of the model in reality. Also, they found that 33% of women who were surveyed are aiming for a body that is impossible for them to attain.<ref>{{cite web |title=Women Need Further Educating Into Extent of Digital Manipulation of Mo |website=[[PRWeb]] |date=26 November 2013 |access-date=19 April 2015 |url=https://www.prweb.com/releases/women_need_further_educating_into_extent_of_digital_manipulation_of_models_in_mags_new_look_survey_finds/prweb11361783.htm}}</ref>

Dove and People Weekly also did a survey to see how photo manipulation affects the self-esteem of females. In doing this, they found that 80% of the women surveyed felt insecure when seeing photos of celebrities in the media. Of the women surveyed who had lower self-esteem, 70% of them do not believe that their appearance is pretty or stylish enough in comparison to cover models.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/post_2329_b_932086 |title=Why Beauty Ads Should Be Legislated |last1=Matlins |first1=Seth |date=2011-08-22 |website=HuffPost |language=en |access-date=2020-04-23}}</ref>

=== Social and cultural implications ===
The growing popularity of image manipulation has raised concern as to whether it allows for unrealistic images to be portrayed to the public. In her article "[[On Photography]]" (1977), [[Susan Sontag]] discusses the objectivity, or lack thereof, in photography, concluding that "photographs, which fiddle with the scale of the world, themselves get reduced, blown up, cropped, retouched, doctored and tricked out".<ref>{{cite book |last=Sontag |first=Susan |author-link=Susan Sontag |year=1977 |title=[[On Photography]] |page=4}}</ref> A practice widely used in the magazine industry, the use of photo manipulation on an already subjective photograph creates a constructed reality for the individual and it can become difficult to differentiate fact from fiction. With the potential to alter body image, debate continues as to whether manipulated images, particularly those in magazines, contribute to self-esteem issues in both men and women.

In today's world,{{Clarify timeframe|date=February 2021}} photo manipulation has a positive impact by developing the creativity of one's mind or maybe a negative one by removing the art and beauty of capturing something so magnificent and natural or the way it should be. According to ''[[HuffPost|The Huffington Post]]'', "Photoshopping and airbrushing, many believe, are now an inherent part of the beauty industry, as are makeup, lighting and styling". In a way, these image alterations are "selling" actual people to the masses to affect responses, reactions, and emotions toward these cultural icons.<ref>{{cite web |last=L. Boutwell |first=Allison |title=Photoshop: A Positive and Negative Innovation |date=February 5, 2012 |url=http://allisonlboutwell.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/photoshopapositiveandnegativeinnovation/}}</ref>

== "Photoshop" as a verb ==
<!--[[Adobe Photoshop#Cultural impact]] links to this section via {{further}}. If the title of this section is changed, please also change it there.-->
{{see also|Image editing|Digital photograph restoration}}
The terms "Photoshop", "photoshopped" and "photoshopping", derived from [[Adobe Photoshop]], are ubiquitous and widely used colloquially and academically when referencing image editing software as it relates to digital manipulation and alteration of photographs.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.macworld.com/2000/08/bc/28photoshop/ |title=Photoshop: It's Not Just a Program Anymore |work=[[Macworld]] |date=August 1, 2000 |last=Blatner |first=David |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050315125811/http://www.macworld.com/2000/08/bc/28photoshop/ |archive-date=March 15, 2005}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |chapter=Photoshop Essentials |chapter-url=http://safari.adobepress.com/0321336585/ch02 |title=Graphic Design Portfolio-Builder: Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator Projects |publisher=Peachpit Press |date=August 15, 2005 |isbn=978-0-321-33658-3}}</ref> The term commonly refers to digital editing of photographs regardless of which software program is used.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=K9RF1eCK3ccC&pg=PT127 |title=Computer Graphic Artist |publisher=Netlibrary |last=Rodriguez |first=Edward |year=2008 |page=163 |isbn=978-81-89940-42-3 |quote=The term photoshopping is a neologism, meaning "editing an image", regardless of the program used.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gIl5hit-RywC&q=photoshopping+intitle:Undead+intitle:Theories+intitle:Constructivism&pg=PA146 |title=Undead Theories: Constructivism, Eclecticism, And Research in Education |publisher=Sense Publisher |last=Geelan |first=David |year=2006 |page=146 |isbn=90-77874-31-3 |quote=And with digital photography, there is also the possibility of photoshopping – digitally editing the representation to make it more aesthetically pleasing, or to change decisions about framing.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8QqrCPzDnxAC&q=photoshopping+shopping&pg=PA382 |title=Medical Records for Attorneys |publisher=ALI-ABA |author=Laurence M. Deutsch |year=2001 |isbn=978-0-8318-0817-4}}</ref>

Trademark owner [[Adobe Inc.]] object to what they refer to as misuse of their trademarked software name, and consider it an infringement on their trademark to use terms such as "photoshopped" or "photoshopping" as a noun or verb, in possessive form or as a slang term,<ref name="AS-PR">{{cite press release |url=https://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressmaterials/pdfs/photoshop_guidelines_pr.pdf |title=Use Of The Photoshop Trademark |publisher=Adobe Systems Incorporated |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150509075144/https://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressmaterials/pdfs/photoshop_guidelines_pr.pdf |archive-date=May 9, 2015 |url-status=dead}}</ref> to prevent "[[generic trademark|genericization]]"<ref name="io9">{{cite web |url=http://io9.gizmodo.com/here-is-adobes-attempt-to-stop-people-from-using-the-te-1726724005 |title=Here Is Adobe's Attempt to Stop People From Using the Term "Photoshop" All Willy-Nilly |publisher=Gawker Media |date=August 26, 2015 |access-date=February 2, 2016 |author=Katharine Trendacosta}}</ref> or "genericide" of the company's trademark.<ref name="BIPLJ">{{cite journal |author=John Dwight Ingram |year=2004 |title=The Genericide of Trademarks |url=http://wings.buffalo.edu/law/biplj/biplj223.pdf |url-status=dead |journal=Buffalo Intellectual Property Law Journal |publisher=State University of New York |volume=2 |issue=2 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202001336/http://wings.buffalo.edu/law/biplj/biplj223.pdf |archive-date=February 2, 2017 |access-date=February 2, 2016 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> Separately, the [[Free Software Foundation]] advises against using "photoshop" as a verb because Adobe Photoshop is [[proprietary software]].<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Photoshop |title=Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) Because They Are Loaded or Confusing: 'Photoshop' |last=Stallman |first=Richard |author-link=Richard Stallman |date=April 21, 2018 |website=[[GNU Project]] |publisher=[[Free Software Foundation]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180528175100/https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Photoshop |archive-date=May 28, 2018 |url-status=live |access-date=May 28, 2018 |quote=Please avoid using the term 'photoshop' as a verb, meaning any kind of photo manipulation or image editing in general. Photoshop is just the name of one particular image editing program, which should be avoided since it is proprietary. There are plenty of free programs for editing images, such as [[GIMP]] [original quote links to GIMP website].}}</ref>

In popular culture, the term ''photoshopping'' is sometimes associated with [[Photomontage|montages]] in the form of visual jokes, such as those published on [[Fark]] and in ''[[Mad (magazine)|Mad]]'' magazine. Images may be propagated [[Internet meme|memetically]] via e-mail as humor or passed as actual news in a form of [[hoax]].<ref>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2001/11/48342 |title=Photoshop: It's All the Rage |magazine=Wired Magazine |date=November 19, 2001 |author=Jenn Shreve}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://archive.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/07/01/photoshop/index_np.html |title=The Photoshopping of the President |work=Salon.com Arts & Entertainment |date=July 1, 2004 |author=Corrie Pikul |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080310214607/http://archive.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/07/01/photoshop/index_np.html |archive-date=March 10, 2008 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> An example of the latter category is "[[Helicopter Shark]]", which was widely circulated as a so-called "''National Geographic'' Photo of the Year" and was later revealed to be a hoax.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/08/0815_020815_photooftheyear.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020820112120/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/08/0815_020815_photooftheyear.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=August 20, 2002 |title=Shark "Photo of the Year" Is E-Mail Hoax |work=[[National Geographic News]] |date=March 8, 2005 |access-date=May 20, 2006 |first1=Stentor |last1=Danielson |last2=Braun |first2=David}}</ref> [[Photoshop contest]]s are games organized online with the goal of creating humorous images around a theme.

== Gallery ==
<gallery mode="packed" heights="180">
File:Photomontage (Forggensee Panorama) -2.jpg|[[Photomontage]] of 16 photos which have been digitally manipulated in [[Photoshop]] to give the impression that it is a real landscape
File:113th congress usa women version altered by office of House Minority Leader.jpg|Before its release to news media, congressional staff digitally added into this 2013 official portrait the heads of four members absent in the original photo shoot.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/pelosi-defends-altered-photo-congresswomen-18132356#.UOciBaAf-W9 |title=Pelosi Defends Altered Photo of Congresswomen |date=Jan 4, 2013 |access-date=January 4, 2013 |author=ABC News |website=[[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress/house-democratic-leader-nancy-pelosi-defends-altered-photo-of-women-house-members/2013/01/04/5192f04c-568b-11e2-89de-76c1c54b1418_story.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190402081443/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress/house-democratic-leader-nancy-pelosi-defends-altered-photo-of-women-house-members/2013/01/04/5192f04c-568b-11e2-89de-76c1c54b1418_story.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=April 2, 2019 |title=House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi defends altered photo of women House members |date=Jan 4, 2013 |access-date=January 4, 2013 |author=Washington Post |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.salon.com/2013/01/04/pelosi_defends_altered_photo_of_congresswomen/ |title=Pelosi defends altered photo of congresswomen |date=Jan 4, 2013 |access-date=January 4, 2013 |author=Salon.com |archive-date=January 8, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130108234305/http://www.salon.com/2013/01/04/pelosi_defends_altered_photo_of_congresswomen/ |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/04/nancy-pelosi-defends-alte_n_2410063.html#slide=1943776 |title=Nancy Pelosi Defends Altered Photo Of Congresswomen (PHOTO) |date=Jan 4, 2013 |access-date=January 4, 2013 |author=Huffington Post |website=[[HuffPost]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130107081711/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/04/nancy-pelosi-defends-alte_n_2410063.html#slide=1943776 |archive-date=January 7, 2013 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wset.com/story/20504132/pelosi-defends-altered-photo-of-congresswomen |title=Pelosi defends altered photo of congresswomen |date=Jan 4, 2013 |access-date=January 4, 2013 |author=WSET News (ABC TV-13)}}{{dead link|date=March 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes}}</ref>
</gallery>
<gallery mode="packed" heights="180">
File: Stock horses in corral.png|Original photograph of horses being sorted in a corral
File: Stock horses in corral composite.png|Digitally manipulated composite: horses in the original photo are added to a photo of a pasture.
File: Flamingos at Sunset.jpg|Photograph manipulated in Photoshop to give the impression it is a painting complete with brush strokes
</gallery>

== See also ==
{{columns-list|colwidth=20em|
* [[List of photo manipulation incidents]]
* [[Derivative work]]
* [[Error level analysis]]
* [[Pascal Dangin]]
* [[Source criticism]]
* [[Straight photography]]
* [[SurfSafe]], browser extension for detecting altered images
* [[Truth claim (photography)]]
* [[Whitewashing (beauty)]]
}}

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== External links ==
* {{Wiktionary-inline}}
* {{Commons category-inline}}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20100804022639/http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/ Digital Tampering in the Media, Politics, and Law] – a collection of digitally manipulated photos of political interest
* [http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database Hoax Photo Gallery] – more manipulated photos
* [http://pyramids.at/library/image%20manipulation.php Erased figures in Kagemni's tomb] — discusses political image manipulation with an example from Ancient Egypt

{{DEFAULTSORT:Photo Manipulation}}
[[Category:Digital art]]
[[Category:Photographic techniques|manipulation]]
[[Category:Photojournalism controversies]]
[[Category:Photography controversies|manipulation]]
[[Category:Photography forgeries|manipulation]]
[[Category:Media manipulation]]