> What do people feel are acceptable digital edits to be applied? It's about how you represent the image. Is it pristine or processed? When applying filters, i

> What do people feel are acceptable digital edits to be applied? It's about how you represent the image. Is it pristine or processed? When applying filters, it is appropriate to admit that filters were applied. If you combine different photos, it is appropriate to admit that multiple photos were combined. Do you really have a newsworthy photo of an athlete winning the race if you digitaly process a photo of from a previous competition to make it look like it is from today? Is it more newsworthy because it's yesterdays images of dead children instead of yesterdays athletes? > Personally I don't see a single clear line where you should stop so I think that it should probably be spelled out in the competition rules. Unfortunately, morally corrupt photographers will claim their manipulated images are following the rules, even when they are not. I see similarities with athletes and doping here. It's not allowed by the rules to enhance your performance with drugs, yet many top-level athletes continue do so. Cheating will not go away but can and must be combatted. News reporting must be resilient against such cheating.