In intelligence circles, is digital photography accepted as a viable form of evidence ???
I ask this because things like photoshop can manipulate images...

I imagine digital photography has been accepted since we stopped plucking canisters of film from spy satellite's out of the sky decades ago.

 

Common sense says that digital photo intelligence is treated the same as any other intelligence - its trustworthiness is based on the source and methods it was obtained by said source.

 

You can manipulate verbal and written data much easier,  just watch your nightly news to catch a glimps how. This has been done for time immortal, yet we have trusted it before the word photoshop was added to the dictionary.

 

 Hell you can do it will film just by just what you leave in or out of the frame, I used to all the time when I used to mess around with photography as a hobby.

 

I do know from personal experience that the use of digital photography as evidence in some courts is not across the board. Though I put this down to sleazy lawyers ( is there any other kind ) and ignorance on the part of the courts.