A definition of photograph is not provided in the text of the act, but I would guess "appears to show" covers this. There will probably have to be a test case. That is, if it looks like or is claimed to be a photograph it's covered.
A real, light-capture photograph can be of an innocent situation appears compromising. Angles, hidden partitions, even a hand temporarily over the wrong place.
The "appears to show" applies to the act captured, not the medium, AFAICS.
Comments
Note that this is already an offense in Scotland. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/section/2
(my highlighting: "appears to show" would cover realistic fakes).
Does an AI generated image fall under their definition of a photograph?
Other laws explicitly define pseudo-photographs (eg: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/37/section/7) so I would suggest that this law does not include photo-realistic computer-generated images.
A definition of photograph is not provided in the text of the act, but I would guess "appears to show" covers this. There will probably have to be a test case. That is, if it looks like or is claimed to be a photograph it's covered.
A real, light-capture photograph can be of an innocent situation appears compromising. Angles, hidden partitions, even a hand temporarily over the wrong place.
The "appears to show" applies to the act captured, not the medium, AFAICS.