Photo-manipulations vs. photography

Started 3 months ago | Polls thread
misterodd
misterodd Senior Member • Posts: 1,284
Re: Photo-manipulations vs. photography

mamallama wrote:

Photo manipulations imply distorting reality which is not photography. Things like blue screening and cutting objects out of a scene are distortions of reality and thus not photography.

I completely understanding your line of thought and it's a fair definition relatively consistent with the opinions of many individuals and groups, photographers and non-photographers, alike.

In a broader sense, perhaps a socio-philosophical sense, however, even "photography" is inherently "manipulative" as it provides no context, especially historical context.  In the case where images are used for purposes outside the aesthetic realm, an image, whether it be a overtly engineered or left alone, possesses the potential to serve ideological purposes, particularly, if this is the very intention of either the photographer or the editor or the medium, etc.

Without context, there is little meaning; coherent understanding can only be derived contextually.  Since an image is frozen in space and time, we have to be careful judges.

An image is one signifier among an inexhaustible many and can fall prey to the machinations of those who do not use photography to enlighten or edify or inspire others.

-- hide signature --

Box Man

 misterodd's gear list:misterodd's gear list
Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 J2 Nikon 1 V2 Nikon 1 J3 Nikon 1 V3 +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow