Let’s not call it “photoshopped”

Please…Let’s not call it photoshopped. I thought about this after the photograph released last week of Princess Catherine and her children was found to be altered. Some stories referred to it as being “photoshopped” and that made me cringe.  It’s just one of those buzzwords that people love to throw out, but has no meaning at all.  Possibly the only plus point of the word is that photographers like me will instantly know you don’t know what you’re talking about when you use it.

Photoshop is just a software program made by Adobe where a digital file is processed. It’s a common practice for every professional photographer to polish off their images just like writers edit their articles before they publish. That’s all it is and I think it shouldn’t really matter. I’ll explain why.

Before Photoshop existed, there were physical darkrooms where you could walk in and process film negatives. If you’re watching this video, I’ll assume you’re either a photographer or an enthusiast so you know what I mean.  You not only can bring out images on films but also do spot removal, replacements, apply dodge & burn, and all this is inherent in image processing just like it is in Photoshop.

If this is confusing just think of the reason why you wouldn't look at print of a film negative today and ask if it was darkroomed…Also, “photoshopped” is not even a verb.

If your real intention is to ask if a photo is manipulated in content, because your gut feeling says a person’s body was inserted into a photo to make it seem as though he was actually present when the picture was taken and he in fact was not present, use manipulated! That could be a graphic artwork, fine art photograph, any digital work or a birthday photo because someone in your family missed your grandma’s 80th birthday. Even for that I would say altered, because there was no malicious intent.  Almost all photos you see now are altered in some way, to increase or lessen shadow, add contrast, even remove an annoying sign.  With most phones, like my Pixel 8 Pro, you don’t even need Photoshop to do some drastic alterations.

I think the only case where one can inquire about the integrity of a photo is if a photo claims to depict a true reality of a political event and that the photographer operates as a trustee of the public. The altering on these images are no longer creative expression or retouching but are deemed as false representation which can go against the code of ethics of photography, and become a manipulation.

I’ll leave it here. In the next video, why it was made such a big scandal out of Princess Catherine’s family photo, and talk about the kill notice. I’ll see you on the next one.