Wokay, I don't know if this issue has been brought up amongst CSers before.
In this technologically advanced era, with the dominance of digital cameras and whatnots, postprocessing has been one of the byproduct of the change. Basically, postprocessing of photographs are widely popular amongst photographers, true? But when does a photograph loses its nature as a photograph?
With digital treatment thru Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro (:P) and other similar counterparts (overlays, textures, brushes ) , we sometimes find it dubious to accept the fact that a photograph is that good initially. I've seen acclaimed photographers like Larajade use textures in many of her pieces and it is very well received by people.
I personally love postprocessing since I am also a web designer,hence I find it only beneficial to infuse and intertwine my skills on both worlds to create a desired outcome. At the end of the day, I always reflect to myself if this is considered "cheating" An easy way out to achieve greater heights?
But yet again, pondering on how the digital sphere keeps on evolving and stepping up, should we start stretching our horizons and redefine the meaning of photographs? Or should we really draw the line and condone classifications that any pics that modify thoroughly is a digital manipulation and lose its nature as photograph. But yet again if you choose the latter, to what extent is a modifications consideer thorough? You be the judge.
I really have a problem of articulating my thoughts but I hope you get the crux of it what I mean. Do share your views on this.