Is Landscape Photography Deceptive?

Landscape Photography certain

I've thought about this throughout my lifetime. Changing my answer constantly. I would have to say yes and no. Its taken having photography as a. hobby to realize my vague makes me look I'm uncertain, unsure, and in decisive. That would be how my understanding of the subject is. Its how I feel photographing landscape. I don't think I understand why until understood why.

If the photograph was taken years ago. Then the landscape might look like there is no structure, building, houses. Time changes landscapes, therefore in this case it would not be deceptihis In the case of the photograph above. Where the structure are removed in the edit process I would have to say its deceptive. The buildings are re, moved cropped to appear more “natural” so to speak. A term used for wild land, or land before it was tamed. Before it became a city. Then its deceptive.

I personally think its both. Its up to the photographer to decide if they are being deceptive or not. In the case of landscape this day, the sunrise looked pretty much like this. However I edited the buildings out allowing the sunrise to look like it look to the photographer. At that moment and time it wasn't focused on the city around just on the morning sunrise. Was my intention as photographer to be deceptive? That's whats so difficult about landscape photography and history, there in no easy of knowing the intention of the photographer. This photo was not intended to deceive. It was intended to show the sunrise. Therefore I show them together. Is it worth selling as a photographic art piece?