This is nothing. Go back in time and read the rules made by the pictorialists and their debates. P.H. Emerson considered spotting out a small annoying bit of glare in one of his platinum prints perfectly acceptable, but considered dodging or burning outright immoral; they called it "sundowning" back then, because window light was used for the contact exposures. In portions of this long thread I have myself made allusions to potentially illegal activity, but as defined by the FBI and certain State art fraud laws in codified fashion. Taste is a different angle. I can't stand eating eggplant or okra either, but does that make me narrow-minded ?
Now back to the mountains. The Park system has actually become worried about a potential decline in public interest or publicly-backed protection due to the recent culture of faux reality. So they're experimenting that with inviting kids and other folks to come to the parks, using all their silly built-in camera and phone apps, and then show the result. But the interesting thing is that, once these kids start really start walking and looking around, they soon forget their digital addiction and start really enjoying the outdoors. Nothing faux can substitute for the real deal. No, there are no rules, but why try to guild the lily, or replace it with plastic flowers? But apparently some don't even know the difference, because they haven't spent the quality time to actually look. Bringing stereotypes into nature and then beating the shot to death to match that kitchy stereotype might be marketable to a certain audience, but it's otherwise pathetic.
