The statement "we don't believe in truth anymore, we believe in images"", has spawned numerous debates in the scholarly world - do we believe in image over truth? Arguments have discussed that imagery can provide truth, however to a certain extent, as the subjective, objective view point of an image and its purposes, alters the truthfulness of the image itself. To extend this endless debate, digital manipulation, a "result of technical enhancement over the years" (Lodriguss 2006), have further caused greater debate in whether images are considered to be truthful in there context. Hence, the scale is unsteady as whether to believe images are truthful or not, which thus, has resulted in evidence to be questioned in the most serious of situations, such as court cases. Therefore, when deciding on whether we still have photographic truth, one must consider the images subjective and objective characteristics and also ensure they understand the ethical and aesthetic aspects. Moreover, in some cases it is believed that digital enhancement becomes ethically acceptable; however it's the intentions and purposes of an image that determine whether or not an image holds truth. Due to these doubts we question whether we still value the truth of photography, which further impacts the question on whether photography still has documentary power. .

             .

             To begin with, photography developed as part of a "cluster of technical inventions and innovations around the middle of the nineteenth century" (Price & Wellz 2002, page 12). It's recognition as a successful "technological invention (Price & Wellz 2002, page 12), it instantly created debates regarding its aesthetic and ethical issues. The term ethics is believed to be a set of rules that is socially constructed on what we consider right and wrong, "conforming to accepted professional standards of conduct (Lodriguss 2006). Whereas, aesthetics "deal with the nature of beauty, art and taste, and things that are pleasing in appearance "(Lodriguss 2006).