{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreid7s5wki6vryxof5fodeyfevcgal5ddvnkq5qx5c7zjqymywgd3ae",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:y4mvqqxmjy6biftl5tzlnwuh/app.bsky.feed.post/3mmc7gnmtwuwy"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreibx64weqjro55iw3xqnc47phzusfqwdmko3sjf5c2qzvberkfqkpe"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/jpeg",
    "size": 350061
  },
  "description": "Why is it that when we find ways to make something easier, people are quick to call it “cheating”? Take dodging and burning—Ansel Adams used those techniques in the darkroom all the time, and no one questioned the legitimacy of the result. Yet now, when similar adjustments happen with a few clicks in Adobe Lightroom...",
  "path": "/is-photography-about-capturing-facts/",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-16T15:11:39.000Z",
  "site": "at://did:plc:y4mvqqxmjy6biftl5tzlnwuh/site.standard.publication/3mmc72c4y2cka",
  "tags": [
    "AI Photo Editing",
    "Digital Darkroom",
    "Digital Workflow",
    "Film Photography Workflow",
    "Film vs Digital",
    "Image Manipulation",
    "Negative Lab Pro",
    "Photography Ethics"
  ],
  "textContent": "Why is it that when we find ways to make something easier, people are quick to call it “cheating”? Take dodging and burning—Ansel Adams used those techniques in the darkroom all the time, and no one questioned the legitimacy of the result. Yet now, when similar adjustments happen with a few clicks in Adobe Lightroom or Adobe Photoshop, the conversation suddenly shifts to authenticity. The labour has changed, but the intent has not. Photography has never been a passive act of recording reality; it has always involved shaping it. Part of the tension comes from a long-standing myth that photography is a truth-telling medium—that a photograph captures reality as it is, rather than as it is shaped. In contexts like journalism, that expectation still matters, and it should. But even in the era of film, photographers made interpretive decisions at every step—what to include in the frame, how to expose it, how to develop it, and how to print it. The darkroom was not a neutral space. It was a place of deliberate choices, where contrast, brightness, and emphasis were actively controlled. The idea that images were once untouched and are now manipulated is more myth than history. That myth becomes even more strained when you look at how modern film photography actually works. When I shoot 35 mm film, the image that exists on the strip after chemical processing is a negative—visible, yes, but not directly shareable or even fully interpretable by most viewers. To make that image accessible, I have to digitise it using a tool like VueScan, typically capturing it as a high-quality DNG file. From there, I use Negative Lab Pro to invert the negative, correct colour, and shape the tones into something that reflects what I saw—or what I want to express. Without that workflow, the photograph effectively doesn’t exist for anyone else. There is no audience for an unscanned negative sitting in a sleeve. So what am I doing in that process? Not chemical processing—that already happened when the film was developed and fixed. What I am doing is interpreting the image in a digital darkroom, much like photographers have always done, just with different tools. The scanner becomes the bridge, and the software becomes the enlarger, filters, and hands in the tray. The fact that it happens on a screen instead of under a safelight doesn’t make it less real or less valid. Where things feel different today is with the rise of AI-assisted tools. Features inside Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Lightroom can now remove a distracting object, replace a sky, or erase a person from the background in seconds. In a travel photo, that might mean removing a stranger who wandered into the frame. In a landscape, it might mean eliminating a trash can that breaks the scene. These choices aren’t entirely new—retouchers have been making similar edits for decades—but the speed, ease, and realism change how we perceive them. This is where the conversation shifts from effort to intent. Dodging and burning guide the viewer’s eye; removing an object changes the scene itself. That doesn’t automatically make it wrong, but it does move the image further along the spectrum from interpretation towards alteration. The important distinction is no longer whether a tool is used, but how far that tool reshapes what was originally in front of the lens—and whether the photographer is transparent about that choice when it matters. Calling any of this “cheating” misses the point. The real issue isn’t whether a tool makes something easier; it’s whether the photographer is being honest about their intent and the context in which the image is presented. In fine art photography, heavy manipulation—including AI-assisted edits—is often part of the creative process. In documentary work, those same edits can undermine trust. Those boundaries have always existed. What has changed is how easily they can be crossed. At the end of the day, photography has always been about interpretation. The tools evolve, the workflow adapts, but the core act remains the same: deciding how to translate a scene into an image that communicates something meaningful. The modern film photography workflow doesn’t diminish that—it makes it explicit. From chemical development to scanning to digital interpretation, the photograph is constructed step by step. The same is true for digital images, whether adjustments are made manually or with AI assistance. The question isn’t whether the process is easier. The question is what choices are being made—and whether those choices serve the story the photographer is trying to tell. Unless I state otherwise, assume every image I share has been processed—chemically, digitally, or both. That can include adjustments to tone and colour, and at times the removal of distracting elements. Often, I don’t have control over everything in a scene when I make the photograph—whether it’s a crowded beach, a passer-by, or something that pulls attention away from the subject. Those choices are part of shaping the image to reflect what I intended to capture, not just what happened to be in front of the lens.",
  "title": "Is Photography About Capturing Facts?",
  "updatedAt": "2026-05-02T18:34:40.000Z"
}