“Photoshop should be banned from every scientific research institution”.
A passionate scientist once offered her untethered and impassioned feedback following one of my How to harness the tools of Illustrator and Photoshop for publication-worthy figures tutorials.
Her comment sparked quite a heavy debate between many of the scientists in the room and, at that time I found it hard to explain my own ethical position without sounding dismissive.
I left feeling resolute that I should have focussed more on the whyscientists should use Illustrator and Photoshop rather than the how.
The problem, is that “Photoshop” has become a proprietary eponym for image manipulation. And manipulation of scientific images is universally unethical. Right?
Would removing Photoshop change practice?
With super powers ranging from time travel, clever cloning and body sculpting, surely this fantastical tool is too dangerous to blend with with the purity of scientific data?
Forensic image analysis is now a common step in the publication pipeline. There’s no doubt that Photoshop seems capable of magic. Magic that could facilitate inappropriate image manipulation and result in serious scientific misconduct, but in cases of scientific fraud is Photoshop really the culprit?
Would removing Photoshop in these situations have changed practice?
The other side of the coin is that there are many examples of published research where the reader has to work hard to decipher the results. Examples where it is difficult to know for certain what the figures are communicating.
Examples where appropriate image manipulation could help to make clear, simple figures that communicate science stories better.
Image manipulation: the guidelines.
Scientists rely on a vast array of technologies to capture, measure, test, display and communicate their research. From high powered fluorescent microscopy, to next generation sequencing and mass spectrometry, raw scientific data needs to be detected or discovered and then the data often needs to be transformed, or manipulated into a comprehensible form.
Scientists must consider ethics, good experimental design and technical guidelines that outline how each of these technologies should be used.