Images and video have long been important assets for representing your brand authentically. As graphics software and generative AI tools become increasingly powerful and accessible, it is vital that authenticity is preserved by not crossing the line from editing to misrepresentation. For industrial brands, where accuracy, trust, and safety matter deeply, knowing where to draw that line is more important than ever.
“Can you just remove this speck?” or “Can you lighten this up a bit?” are daily requests from account colleagues and clients alike. They reflect the reality of industrial PR that time, budget, and access constraints mean images are often taken on phone cameras by people already on-site rather than by professional photographers.
We’re genuinely grateful for that support, because without it, many important stories wouldn’t be told at all. But it also means image quality varies, and some level of editing is often necessary.
At SE10, however, we’re clear that not all edits are equal. Some edits will improve an image and make it more suitable for its intended purpose, but other edits go further by falsifying or misrepresenting reality.
Just as the written facts we provide to the media must be accurate and verified, we apply the same rigour to visuals. These standards are crucial for maintaining the trust we’ve cultivated between our agency and journalists, between the brands we represent and their customers, and increasingly, between our content and the systems that evaluate it.
This approach closely mirrors the principles followed by leading photo and news agencies such as Getty Images or AFP whose role depends entirely on public trust. As the Associated Press states, it does not allow any alteration that adds or removes elements from an image, and it refrains from distributing AI-generated images that falsely depict reality. As it becomes harder to distinguish between authentic and manipulated media, maintaining clear standards like these cements the credibility of these organisations.
While industrial PR operates in a different context to news reporting, the expectations of accuracy are not as far apart as some assume. In trade media especially, images are often treated as evidence as much as illustration, reused across articles, presentations, tenders, and reports long after publication.
Illustration vs representation: different images, different rules
Not all industrial imagery serves the same purpose, and it’s important to be clear about that. Product brochures, campaign visuals, and renders are often designed to illustrate a machine or system clearly, sometimes in ways that are difficult or impossible to capture on a live site. In these contexts, more extensive visual manipulation is both expected and appropriate, provided it does not mislead.
Images to be shared with the media, however, play a fundamentally different role. These images are representations of reality, providing evidence of what was installed, deployed, operated, or achieved. They are scrutinised in ways that extend far beyond a single campaign and for this reason, the standards applied to images distributed to the media must be higher. Here, editing should support clarity and understanding, not create an idealised version of events that never existed.
What we will edit, and why
When an image is intended to represent reality rather than illustrate a concept, our approach to editing is guided by a single principle: improve clarity without changing meaning. Acceptable edits include:
• Cropping
• Minor colour correction, limited lightening or darkening, gentle sharpening
• Removing dust spots caused by a dirty lens or sensor
• Removing redeye from flash photography
• Blurring number plates, children’s faces, or other sensitive details for privacy
• Removing conflicting brand logos, for example from clothing or vehicles
These edits improve clarity and focus without altering the underlying reality of the scene.
Where we draw the line
We expect images to be honest, not perfect, and we therefore avoid making edits that change what the image communicates, even if they appear small or well-intentioned. These edits include:
• Adding or removing people or objects
• Extreme colour grading that alters materials or weather conditions
• Adding PPE to images, or editing out unsafe behaviour (please note this is a hypothetical example that illustrates the standards of quality, accuracy, and trust we share with our clients and not something they have ever asked us to do)
In industrial sectors, this last point is especially important. Editing PPE into a photo does nothing to improve site safety, but it does risk normalising unsafe practices and undermining internal safety standards. We have a responsibility to flag these issues rather than hide them.
Why this matters for industrial brands
Balancing timelines, resources, and high expectations exerts a lot of pressure for marketing teams to “tidy things up” visually. But brand credibility is built through consistency between what the brand says and does, and for this reason, SE10 does not compromise on authenticity. Images are no exception to this. A single manipulated visual can undermine a message that has otherwise been carefully earned, and the rise in AI content means that it’s even more important for us to remain trustworthy in low-trust environments.
Search engines and generative systems are also quickly becoming more sophisticated at identifying patterns and inconsistencies that point to a lack of credibility. This applies just as much to images and videos as it does to text and third-party sources. Visuals that overpromise or misrepresent reality are therefore likely to be labelled by automated systems as low quality and will not be able to represent the brand with authority.
What this means for marketing teams
For marketing and communications leaders, the goal is to set clear, robust standards for editing and presenting visuals.
That means:
• Being clear internally about what editing is acceptable and why
• Resisting pressure to “fix” issues that should be addressed operationally
• Viewing imagery as a long-term trust asset, not just material for a single campaign.
Most importantly, it means recognising that chasing perfection cannot lead to authenticity when editing an image. Authenticity results from the alignment between the messaging of the image, and the reality that image represents.
At SE10, we apply journalistic standards not only to words, but to visuals, stories, and evidence. If you’d like to talk about how your imagery and content stand up to scrutiny — from trade media, customers, and increasingly, algorithms — our team is always happy to have a conversation.
Ben Poulten
Creative Designer
About the author
Ben is SE10’s creative designer, combining technical skill with storytelling flair to produce high-impact visual content across graphic design, animation, and video. With a background as a documentary film editor and director, he brings a sharp eye for narrative and emotion to every project. His creative versatility spans formats — from short-form animations to long-form videos and he has hands-on experience managing shoots on active construction sites and quarries, with a keen focus on safety and logistics.
