Why is amateur photography often considered more authentic than work produced by professional photographers, artists or documentary makers? Vernacular photography, photographs taken by amateurs or unknown photographers, presents scenes of ordinary life from snapshots of the family to images of pets, possessions and vacations. Vernacular photography is the common language. People have been using photography as a way to keep a visual record of their lives for over a century. It could be argued that perhaps there is something more honest, direct and candid about this type of photography, it has an innocence and naivety that might simply be missing from the work of a professional. “Perhaps precisely because of his promptness and his own numbers, this nameless photographer could ultimately be the truest and most precious document of our times.” (Graves 1977) However, to fully answer this question of 'authenticity', I think it is important to go back to the beginning and look at the birth of amateur photography and how it was presented to the masses, as well as looking at today's world explosion era digital, a far cry from the early days when photography required huge cameras, patience and money. For much of the nineteenth century, cameras were produced in relatively small quantities; made from expensive materials such as brass, mahogany and leather, putting it out of reach of the general public. By far the most significant event in amateur photography was the introduction of the Kodak camera in 1888, invented and marketed by American businessman and entrepreneur George Eastman. Eastman realized that there was a huge untapped market of people who wanted to take their own photographs if they had the means to do so. The Kodak was… middle of the road… in terms of composition, lighting and subject expression. The photograph is taken by a machine that checks all the technical aspects and then immediately prints the resulting images. You cannot manipulate these images unless they have been scanned. To participate in the World Press Photo competition, you must be a professional photographer or photojournalist. In 2010, World Press Photo disqualified Stepan Rudik for altering the content of the image, which is strictly prohibited in the competition. FIG.1 above shows the original image and the final image submitted by Rudik; Rudik decided to remove the foot that was positioned between the index finger and thumb. Although this was a very minor change, it ultimately went against WPP rules. Long gone are the early days when photography required huge cameras, patience and money.