There are many great artists of the past and many more in the present; some are recognised for their talent in sculpture and pottery, while others have built their reputation through their paintings.

Not all of them received a warm welcome from the public; some were considered strange or even non artistic. Yet many have become celebrated figures, widely acknowledged as remarkable artists. Although some of their work is not to everyone’s taste, for example the later style of Pablo Picasso, they are still accepted as artists.

Each time I see an image shared in a public forum or on social media that departs from convention – whether through style or through a level of manipulation that some believe exceeds what is acceptable according to ‘specialists’ – I encounter countless negative remarks. Comments such as “Too much Photoshop”, or “this is not photography”, or “do you call this photography?”, appear repeatedly and with striking certainty.

To understand this reaction, it is worth stepping back several decades. On 14 November 1840, on the fifth floor of 45 Rue Laffitte in Paris, a young boy was born; a future artist. As he grew, his father intended for him to enter the family grocery business; however, he aspired to become an artist, while his mother pursued a career as a singer.

On 1 April 1851, he enrolled at the secondary school of the arts in Le Havre. He became locally known for his charcoal caricatures, which he sold for ten to twenty francs. Around 1856, on the beaches of Normandy, he met fellow artist Eugène Boudin, who became his mentor and introduced him to oil painting; Boudin also taught him the technique of en plein air, or outdoor painting.

During visits to the Louvre, he observed painters copying the old Masters; instead of doing the same, he brought his own paints, sat by a window, and painted what he saw. He remained in Paris for several years; it was there that he met other young painters, including Édouard Manet, who would become a close associate.

From the late 1860s, he and other like minded artists faced repeated rejection from the conservative Académie des Beaux Arts; they were not regarded as true artists with a legitimate style. Their work was dismissed as odd, different, and insufficient; to many critics, they were simply not artists. The sentiment is not unfamiliar; it echoes the tone of modern criticism that dismisses work as overly manipulated or artificial.

In response, this emerging artist, together with others who shared a similar vision, formed the Société anonyme des artistes peintres, sculpteurs et graveurs; a cooperative and anonymous association created to exhibit their work independently. At their first exhibition in April 1874, he presented a painting that would ultimately give the movement its name. That artist was Claude Monet; the movement was Impressionism. Today, he is recognised as one of the most influential painters of all time; yet he, along with many others, was once rejected by parts of the establishment.

There are countless painting techniques and styles; all are encompassed within a single word: art.

There are equally countless photographic techniques and styles; why should they not be encompassed by the same word: art? For photographers, photography is a form of artistic expression; each practitioner should be free to pursue a unique vision and to express it as they see fit.

Ansel Adams, often regarded as one of the great masters of photography, was among the most dedicated manipulators of his images in his time; he openly acknowledged that he manipulated his pictures heavily in order to realise the final print he had envisioned on location. By modern standards, one might describe this as excessive manipulation. Should he, therefore, be dismissed as anything less than a master?