Harry13

"Not only is the use vs non-use of a camera irrelevant...."

Au contraire, it is everything. A painting is not a photograph and neither are images not made with a camera. Why are you guys in such a twist about this? Do painters get upset when you refuse to call what they create "photographs"? Does it matter what tools you use to create an image? And does it matter whether or not it represents the creators imagination or something that exists in reality? I think not. Why call it a photograph? There are lots of things in the world that ain't photgraphs. Does that mean they're worthless? Personally, I like Motzart better than any visual image that I ever saw, photo, painting or whatever. Thelonius Monk too! Not to mention Miles and Bird! I think you guys just like to argue. :-)

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Interesting you brought up music. I (too) enjoy music more than graphic arts. I may do photography but I can't play music but I listen to all sorts of music and have a massive collection and knowledge of music. Perhaps at the apex is Mr. John Coltrane! I don't read so much tress about differences in tastes of music as I can understand others reasons.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

Hey, you left out Trane.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

The definitions are simple enough. What are not so simple are the meanings that we end up with through common usage. The best we can do is persist in proper usage of the terms and hope that it rubs off on those who misuse the terms.

You're right in noting that the root source is relevant. If the root source is an image generated by a photographic imaging device, it's a photograph.

If that image becomes modified because of post processing it becomes a modified photograph.

That isn't automatically a bad thing because photographs, regardless of how good they are, are never a perfect capture of reality. And regardless of whether the post processing is good or bad, it doesn't stop being a photograph because of those modifications. It goes from being an SOOC photograph to being a modified photograph. Almost all photographs ever taken have been modified in some way.

If the post processing is done well it becomes an enhanced photograph.

"Modified" and "enhanced" should not be dirty words in the world of photography.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

I have to say it once again, my camera has never, not even once. captured the image I saw. Ever since I bought my first scanner, long before I bought my first digital camera, Photoshop has allowed me to show the world what I really saw.

Harry13

Yep, I could have listed Coltrane as well, saw him often when I lived in NYC. He was a great artist.
I'm with you, I have several cameras (Canon and Nikon mostly) but no musical instruments.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Both enhanced and made worse are subsets of modified.

Perception of definition.....

Iron Sight Loc: Utah

Im just learning what can be done with Shutter Speed, ISO, Aperture.
TRIPOD!

sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD

All of these are enhancements

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

But let's be honest about this. Listeners of music (and makers of music) sort and categorize music at least to the same extent as visual artists sort and categorize art. And you haven't even begun to see and understand "brand loyalty" until you get a bunch of trumpet players or trombone players in a room and hear them start talking about the various benefits and foibles of King vs. Conn vs. Bach vs.whoever made instruments. It can make our little Nikon vs. Canon discussions sound like an afternoon tea party. And that's before they even get to a comparison of various mouthpiece choices.

And do not ever think that all musicians think that all genres of music are equally artistic. Even though some well-known rock musicians were originally educated as classical musicians, and even though some musicians do cross over some times, the lines are really pretty clearly drawn. Conductors of "Pops" orchestras have worked for years to blur those lines, but they are still very much there.

The instrumentation discussion also needs some care and calibration. If you attend a concert of "classical" music, you still today are going to see and hear it performed using "classical" instruments. There are several big band orchestras in my area. Usually four trumpets, four trombones, four woodwinds (sometimes a flute), piano, upright bass, and drum kit. Occasionally there will be a novelty instrument or two.

Jazz and fusion are a little different, but they have always been a little bit differeunt. Wind ensembles also vary a little bit sometimes, but usually not by much. And of course, there's no telling what a rock band might do, but even Chicago and The Eagles are pretty consistent in how they make music. So were bands that were formed to be "different," like the Tijuana Brass and even the Baja Marimba Band.

If you want a little bit of good education on this subject accompanied with some laughter, dig out your old P.D.Q. Bach recordings by Professor Peter Schieckle of the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople. He looks at both sides of this argument from a humorous perspective. The more you know about music, the funnier it will be. My only regret is that all of his recordings were made in the days before rap was a thing.

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

Many women enhance their appearance. When they don't do we refer to them as "straight out of waking up"?😁

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

I noticed that and commented too.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

zonedoc

The late great photographer Ansel Adams ( who was also a classically trained pianist ) often likened a photograph to a musical score to be interpreted by the musician (photographer ).
His photographs were “previsualized” so as to make post processing a creation of his interpretation of the scene photographed.
This is what makes a photographic image a work of art rather than a snapshot.