Those technique don't work very well when the edits are done on the RAW files directly. I creates a lot of false positive and negatives. When a picture is shar

Those technique don't work very well when the edits are done on the RAW files directly. I creates a lot of false positive and negatives. When a picture is shared by the original photographer directly, it's extremely hard to differentiate between fake and real. Just to name a few reasons for it that come to mind: -The original resolution is wayyy bigger than what you see online. When you go from 300Mpx (eg. a panorama) down to 2 - 10 mpx and add compression, it will hide most of the artefacts. -better lenses means they have less distortion and sharpness problem at the edge of the frame. Makes it easier to blend different pictures together seamlessly -raw files editing allows a lot more modification to the colors without degradation or leaving traces. You are effectively changing the choices that the camera makes when it creates the colors. There is no difference between changing the color temperature in the camera and in photoshop if you use RAW. With jpg editing done by a third party... yeah, those are easy to spot with the right tools