Response To Point, Shoot, Retouch, and Label?

I agree with the statement, "Some say the idea (of a law to make advertisers state that their photos were photoshoped) is aimed at the wrong target, given that nearly all advertising photograph is retouched." I believe that a law forcing advertisers to state that their photos have been retouched is completely ludicrous. It removes the competitive capitalistic idea of making your product seem better than any other product. This is the base of advertising. If they said in the ad that using this product would make you look like the model, the line would have been crossed. It is no different than a beer commercial in which the man with the beer has beautiful women surrounding him.
A photo is authored by the last person to have a major affect on it, in my personal opinion. In the case of modeling advertisements, and beauty advertisements, that person would be the "retoucher." By finishing the edit of the photo, he turns it from a more realistic image, into what they want it to be. Without that change, the ad is not close to what they want, because people who are flawless in a beauty sense are in extremely short supply, if they even exist. This makes his job the most important because it turns the image into the final product. Along those lines, the person who should get the credit for the photograph should be the neither the photographer or the retoucher, it should go to the person who designed the shoot. The art is the designing of the model's position, and how she should look. That makes the photo what it is. The retoucher is the author of the photo, in a sense that they do the physical work to make it what the person who designed it, wants it to be. Because he is the one who does the physical work, i believe he authored the photo. But the credit for the creation, should go to the person who created the idea.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/fashion/03Boyer.html