Non-story? Photography is by default understood to be creative work, the very first thing people do is replace entire sky with computer generated imagery if it

Non-story? Photography is by default understood to be creative work, the very first thing people do is replace entire sky with computer generated imagery if it doesn't look interesting enough. There are certainly situations where authentic reproduction is important - law, journalism, documentary, medicine. And if she used someone else's photos without credit/permission, that's a problem. But that family portrait or pack of wolves shot over your mantelpiece? Edited! If you really want to look at your pimples or nearby hiker's behind every day, negotiate that with the photographer. But most people want art, not a police mugshot in these situations. I am not saying there is nothing there, just that malice is not proven and someone has wasted a lot of time refuting what has not been explicitly claimed. I would buy a print if I like, the price was right and especially if money went to a good cause. If anything, I would want the close up one to be brightened/de-hazed for my living room, even though nature doesn't always look like that.