Exercise Liz Wells' The Real and the Digital

This part discusses how new kinds of digital media have transformed the means of image making and its practices and how that has influenced the conception of reality that traditionally has been associated with photography. 

A few questions arise with these transformations: How has it changed the nature of photography, our sense of reality and the relation of photography with other media? I thought it was interesting to read how the alteration of images is much more profound than it used to be and how a photograph has intrinsically changed. Of course this is true, there's no more chemical, tangible object that is being created, the light is not captured in something tangible anymore, but I'm not sure if this means that reality itself has more or less diminished. First of all, what we see is only one aspect of our experience of reality to begin with, second, a printed photograph was no more or less a representation of it with its own short comings, besides all the issues of decisions of what has been put in the frame and which technical processes the light has gone through before the 'reality' was burnt on paper. 

I agree that a photograph's meaning nowadays is more derived from what it is culturally than what it is technically. When we see a visual representation of something, we call it a photograph, whether it is directly taken from a real scene or not, or whether it is a tangible piece of photo paper or not.