A Commentary on Photo Legitimacy

Started 6 months ago | Discussion thread
M Hamilton
Regular MemberPosts: 188
Like?
Re: A Commentary on Photo Legitimacy
In reply to amalric, 6 months ago

amalric wrote:

M Hamilton wrote:

I agree that photography is the art of seeing, but capturing it in a picture goes hand in hand with that "seeing."

What I mean by this is that you see a Lynx at the zoo and you see a beautiful snowscape, you did not "see" these two elements at the same time, so why does a photo claim to show these two elements at the same time. This is not "legitimate."

Sorry but you have ignored all the context by removing the quoting, so why should I believe that you deal differently with photography?

LOL

Am.

--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

I'm sorry that you feel that way. I did not mean to disregard context, my post was a response to yours and as such any reader can refer to your post that is immediately above mine. Just to be on the safe side:

amalric wrote:

I think that the answer is easy it being implemented in serious contests: minimal intervention.

It was also HCB's belief and of many others - one must convey human emotion not artifices.

OTH those were introduced from the start, in daguerrotypes that were arranged as composites, because the lens could not cover the whole FOV.

So IMHO, for scientific purposes one might use time lapse and other techniques that show the underlying reality.

But basically photography is related to the act of seeing, which predates the picture.

Am.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow