Bob writes ---
>And even if they don't ... I'm sure the phrase "content of photos " is >open to interpretation.
>"Levels"? "curves"? "spotting? before long the telegraph pole >they cloned out was not "content" but distraction. The lion was >content but the background - cloned in to replace the zoo bars - >was background *not* content.
The subtle alterations were "grandfathered in", since they were in constant use long ago, so they're allowed. There is a clearer definition of this elwehere on the web, but in the end, the editor, like the kings of old, decide what the reality will be.
>When technology has has advanced to the stage where a lie is no >longer detectable we might as well dispense with the word altogether.
It won't vanish, because we humans are habitual liars, and not that good at it. The word will continue to have usefulness, but I get your drift with regard to technology.
--- Luis
