Dodging and burning stay photography, Liquify doesn't
Blemish and light work is retouching. Reshaping is something else, and the boundary is worth stating before you cross it.

Where the line sits
A photograph of a face is a record of light. Retouching that respects that record means working on what the light did — a shadow that fell badly under an eye, a temporary blemish, a catch-light that needed one clean clone pass. Ansel Adams called the negative the score and the print the performance; the retoucher's job, on that reading, is to play what was actually composed, not to rewrite it.
The distinction that holds up in practice is this: anything a different lens position, a reflector or a better hour of light could have fixed is retouching. Anything that changes the geometry of the face — the distance between features, the width of a jaw, the shape of a nose — is something else. Liquify in Photoshop ↗ and the equivalent warp tools in Affinity Photo 2 exist, and they are useful on objects. On faces, the moment a warp handle moves a feature, the photograph has become an illustration of a face that was not there.

That matters practically as well as philosophically. A distorted face tends to lose the quality that made it worth photographing. Likeness is not a single feature; it lives in the proportions and the way they move relative to each other. Push a jaw three pixels and the person may become unrecognisable to people who know them well, even if the change looks minor on screen.

Light work sits firmly on the right side of that line. Dodging and burning — brightening a highlight on a cheekbone, darkening a shadow that flattened the face — is the craft of correcting what the camera recorded against what the eye would have seen in the room. A healing brush run over a blemish on a consenting adult subject is cosmetic work with a long and uncontroversial history in photographic portraiture. Neither changes what was there; both try to recover it more accurately.
The test worth running before reaching for a warp tool: could a photographer with more time and better light have captured this ↗? If yes, it is retouching. If the answer is no — if the change belongs to no camera angle that exists — the image has crossed into something the photograph itself never contained.