Photoshop was developed as a tool with the purpose of enhancing images using low cost software, available for designers who were not a part of larger design firms. Since it's inception, Photoshop has remained a designer's tool, used for advertisements, movie posters, business designs and more. Eventually the use of Photoshop crept over into the mass market, and became an acceptable tool for use on all levels. with this new acceptance and use by new sectors of business, the role and accepted uses for Photoshop started to change.

Worldwide Photoshop has been used to alter history. Female political leaders visiting  Islamic countries (most famously) Hillary Clinton, have been Photoshopped out of high profile meetings. North Korea, has been accused of altering images in efforts to make their military forces appear more powerful than what they are.

In the advertising sector, Photoshop has altered female and male models in drastic extremes. In some cases examples have been found where body parts have been removed, or the body has been contoured in a manner not human possibly. Due to this, multiple studies have shown that both female and male body image and esteem issues have been impacted, resulting in numerous health concerns including eating disorders, and multiple plastic surgeries. Because of this, certain countries have enacted laws requiring that advertisers publically disclaim that models have been altered, or enhanced. 

In the art world, photographers have been debating whether or not the use of Photoshop qualifies an artist as a photographer, or a digital artist. "Purists" argue that the photo happens in the camera and the produced shot, should be a 100% reflection of what was captured. Some argue that Photoshop is a photographer's way of showing what he or she "wishes" they would have captured, versus reality. Others argue that it brings out the qualities of a photo that certain conditions may not have allowed that day i.e  lighting conditions, or poor weather. 

With the private use of Photoshop, consumers using the Internet can now alter themselves, friends, celebrities or even history and upload them online as their own form of altered news, or misinformation. Most of these photos are viewed as humorous, however to the sector of viewers not versed with Photoshop, the imagery may appear real and may influence, or alter how and what they believe.

So the question becomes: should we require advertisers, news sources and artists to disclaim when they have altered an image? And should they be prepared to explain how and what adjustments they have made? Others argue that in critical thinking, students should be taught how to recognize an altered image, and understand the audience it is intended for. 

Personal Context

I am interested in writing about this topic, as it is a subject very relevant to my area f study: Media Arts. In my cognate, I have focused on the area of photography. I have personally manipulated images for the sole purpose of art. I have also enhanced images for the use of "beautifying" a subject in portraits. There have been cases, unknown to the model that I have removed blemishes,, or altered makeup, and skin tone. Although I find these altercations minor, and barely noticeable, it does bring to mind the moral ethics of altering the true appearance of a person in efforts to have a more pleasing picture. 


Amanda Fortini suggests that Photoshop isn't the real evil, it's our ability to judge and understand imagery: truth verses fiction. Fortini argues that we should be educating people to critically read an image like we do an article: intended audience etc. http://nymag.com/thecut/2010/08/photoshop_retouching.html#

Erin Cunningham reviews a proposed bill that would require advertisers to inform the audience that an image has been altered. Concerns voiced include health and body image matters and health data. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/22/our-photoshopping-disorder-the- truth-in-advertising-bill-asks-congress-to-regulate-deceptive-images.html

Ignacio Palacios, is a famous landscape photographer, who reviews the debate amongst "purists" and photographers who alter their images in photoshop. He examines the concept of "are you a photographer or not" if you alter imagery. https://luminous-landscape.com/the-very-old-debate-of-image-manipulation


The topic is arguable due to health data acquired worldwide on the effects of esteem and body image based on altered imagery. We also must acknowledge that altered images have been used (and attempted to be used) to alter history or gain political might. In my research I may need to broaded into older methods of image manipulation, and how psychologically it impacts the viewer. 
