In a recent online article on Luminous Landscape, Mark Schacter argues who a photographic cheat is.
His question, presented in a form of dialogue, argues that whether using post-processing software to enhance photos is a cheat because the photographer manipulates photos with editing software.  It is obvious that nowadays editing software has given us in digital photography more flexibility than ever.
So is film more faithful than digital?
The answer is not as simple as it really depends on how we interpret the degree of “faithful”.  We have been doing tricks for many years on films, during developing and printing. For serious photographers you were never satisfied with the prints developed from the one-hour photo lab in the old days.
Until one day you found out how to develop and print your own films, or you took positives such as Kodachrome.
My experience of switching from film to digital has enabled me to take a total control of the whole process from taking the photos, scrutinising them on the monitor and finally printing them out on the paper. While seeing them on the screen using Adobe Lightroom, I stick to the belief that I will not do anything to alter the image.
It is an ethical issue between “digitally enhanced” and “digitally modified” or “digitally altered”.
The media of recording has changed gradually but the photographers can never slow their pace to catch up with the latest challenge.

%d bloggers like this: