More on FAQ #306

The important word is “undetectable”

  • 1. Why is the public more skeptical of impressive-looking photographs now when the manipulation of photographs is as old as photography itself?

    Because the public knows how easy it is to undetectably doctor photographs in the age of Photoshop and AIFI.

    In particular, the ability to instantly and undetectably doctor non-“light”-related aspects of photographs (“forms and shapes”) has been a revelation for photographers — but an alarm bell for viewers.

  • 2. It used to be a task left to experts

    Back in the film era (the 19th and 20th centuries), it was generally very difficult, time-consuming, and technically demanding to doctor photographs without detection by the viewer.

    Even though that “retouching” was usually performed by experts, much of the time it was readily apparent — especially on examination of an original print or negative. (See for example the images from the exhibit and book Faking It: Manipulated Photography Before Photoshop.)

    As a result of the factors mentioned above, the public in the pre-digital era wasn’t nearly as skeptical about the photographs they encountered.

  • 3. But now anyone with a smartphone can do it

    In the 21st century, now that the public knows that photographs can be instantly altered (with the tap of a finger) by any smartphone user without detection by viewers—

    — and more recently, now that images that look exactly like “photographs” can be created not with a camera but with a computer—

    —the public has become understandably much more skeptical.

  • 4. Further reading

    Five decades of increasing public skepticism

    On the reversal of the “trust equation”

    More on the difficulty of film-era manipulations

    More on the ease of digital-era manipulations