Another Kick in The Pants for Photoshop 'artists'.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Err, as I understand it, we are not talking about a Pulitzer. It was some crap competition run by the marketing dept at Nikon, and the guy won a camera bag.

Yeah, he lied. Big deal.

It is known as "broken-window policing."

[GrahamBy]

Hmm, fair point.

[Telecaster]

My motto about this sort of stuff: so long as you disclose, anything goes. 

-Dave-

[amolitor]

What must we disclose, and what can we assume as 'given'?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

What must we disclose, and what can we assume as 'given'?

As a minimum, "given" is that you are not going to deliberately deceive, as was the OP case.

[Nelsonretreat]

Err, as I understand it, we are not talking about a Pulitzer. It was some crap competition run by the marketing dept at Nikon, and the guy won a camera bag.

Yeah, he lied. Big deal.

I'm totally in agreement! What the heck is wrong with people lying? I've been trying to teach this to my kids for years. Lying about unimportant things is a no brainer. Only saps tell the truth. Why can't they teach this sort of thing in schools?

[Alan Klein]

The picture is mainly presented as a photo-journalist type shot which has even a higher standard for non-manipulation.

It's especially a big deal to the other entrants.   Nikon had to apologize to protect their relations with their customers.

[kencameron]

Undisclosed or non-obvious composites are the antithesis of photography.

I wouldn't say that, because I think it works better to understand "photography" as a very broad descriptive term, meaning something like "making images using a camera and post processing", and to separate out ethical considerations about what is done within that domain. Importing the ethical considerations into the definition of photography (as I think you are doing) seems to create misunderstanding and raised blood pressure. I agree, though, that transparency about post processing is sometimes essential, particularly where there are rules (competitions) and/or an expectation that the image will be in some sense "telling the truth" (documentary or press photography). Where there are no rules and no expectations (much "art photography") then transparency about the means may be interesting but certainly isn't mandatory, and it may even be legitimate for the artist/photographer to deliberately mislead the viewer, or at least play with the expectation (from which photography that looks as if it might represent something seen can't easily escape) that a certain kind of truth is being told. There are grey areas (some "landscape art photography") which give rise to heated debate. Is it enough for it to be beautiful, or does it have to show everything that was there? An issue we go over again and again on this site, and for good reason, IMO.

[Nelsonretreat]

Here's a thought to avoid all these arguents. You could have two categories in photo competitions.

Category 1 (for Photographers.)
 I took the photograph and I submitted it.
Category 2 (for Artists) 
I took the photograpgh and then I added stuff or mabe I stitched several photgraphs together , Oh, maybe I also added something that wasn't there in the original photograph. Oh I forgot to say I also had a brilliant moon shot I took in 2003 and I thought it would look great if I added it to my entry. Oh and I didn't like the color of the grass so I changed it and the rocks didnt look pink enough in the sunset  so I made them pink rather than their real colour. Oh and I nearly forgot the water wasnt milky white the way I Like it so I sorted that out as well.

[Rob C]

Here's a thought to avoid all these arguents. You could have two categories in photo competitions.

Category 1 (for Photographers.)
 I took the photograph and I submitted it.
Category 2 (for Artists) 
I took the photograpgh and then I added stuff or mabe I stitched several photgraphs together , Oh, maybe I also added something that wasn't there in the original photograph. Oh I forgot to say I also had a brilliant moon shot I took in 2003 and I thought it would look great if I added it to my entry. Oh and I didn't like the color of the grass so I changed it and the rocks didnt look pink enough in the sunset  so I made them pink rather than their real colour. Oh and I nearly forgot the water wasnt milky white the way I Like it so I sorted that out as well.

Nelson, these are wonderful ideas that you propose: I'm surprised that nobody thought of them before!

What would art be if it were nothing more than a mirror to the moment? At least a cracked mirror may introduce some magic, even if at the risk of seven leaner years which, come to think of it, no true artist would really notice as being any the more lean than one of the others...

Rob C