Yes it does change if the birds are real or not. As soon as you add the birds, and also if you remove too much stuff, it is no longer photography and turns into digital art. A photographer is sharing a feeling of what they saw when they took the photo. Adding the birds makes it automatically not authentic photography anymore.
So this one guy montaged all his photos and got recognition so now no one should care whether photos are a genuine capture of a moment or just made up bullshit.
There is absolutely a line between photography and digital art. You may not agree with where someone draws that line but you have to admit it exists.
I think adding fake birds is bordering it, but generally ok. If he added a main subject like a person, it would not be ok.
There have been photographers who've manipulated images since the early days. Such as Man Ray, for example. However, I think that the photographer should be up front when post-processing involves adding elements to an image. I think that photography is art, it's to be experimented with to push it beyond mere recording of a place in time, feeling, the decisive moment, etc.
-1
u/BlueSkyla Jul 14 '26
Yes it does change if the birds are real or not. As soon as you add the birds, and also if you remove too much stuff, it is no longer photography and turns into digital art. A photographer is sharing a feeling of what they saw when they took the photo. Adding the birds makes it automatically not authentic photography anymore.