Doctoring Docs? Say It Ain't So!

Now that we have a world where 're-enactments' are almost mandatory in historical documentaries, where does that leave us with regard to doctoring up other parts of the film? Is touching up a photo ok? Most purists, I'm sure, cringe at the sight of historical re-enactments and would never even think of changing something in a photo shot for the film. Unfortunately, most newcomers to the doc field wouldn't think twice and I think that's affecting even those filmmakers who have been in the biz for decades.

As I screened a recent project, a photo came across the screen that I remembered had been touched up for aesthetic purposes. No, it wasn't to make a blemish disappear - it was to make two PEOPLE disappear! The photo that appears in the film has three brothers standing together smiling for the camera. The original photo has FIVE people in the shot - with one person standing on either side of the brother standing in the middle so that the other 2 are on the outside of the group.

Now, does this breach documentary ethics? I'm not quite certain. Sure, it doesn't really effect the fact that the three brothers were actually together for the shot, but does portraying this doctored shot as a photograph of actual events undermine the factual ideals of documentary film?

I'll have to mull this one over. It's that 'slippery slope' I worry about...