Home » in English » Comments about our Editorial » Two women with a red dress
|
| women in red dress [message #956 is a reply to message #115 ] |
Fri, 27 May 2005 11:01   |
 Meyer, Salvelio
Messages: 4
Registered: April 2005 |
Junior Member |
|
|
05:51am Mar 17, 2004
Holding onto the past is no longer an option in our rapidly changing world. We must learn from it, but not use it as an excuse to shy away from the wonderful things happening in the digital era of photography.
I was told, a few years ago, to exchange my comfort zone for a discomfort zone, by a very dear friend of mine. And to say the truth I have never looked back, I am finally free of the oudated ideas and concepts revolving around the field I specialize in, namely documentary photography.
When we talk about Òdocumentary photographyÓ, images of starving children in Africa and people dying in war torn countries always come to mind, and we always want to believe that the images are a true reflection of a moment frozen in time and that the photographer did not influence the scene in any way.
To me, fashion, food, wedding, advertising, and many other forms of photography are all documentary in nature. They document happenings within our social structures, and will oneday be used as records of days gone by. They are documents for future generations.
We now have the tools to let our imagination run wild, and holding down that imagination with outdated ideas, is a clear indication that many photographers have baggage they will have to get rid of before they can fully experience one of the greatest achievements since man walked on the moon.
Salvelio Meyer
Port Elizabeth (South Africa)
March 2004
|
|
|
| RED-DRESSAGE [message #957 is a reply to message #115 ] |
Fri, 27 May 2005 11:06 |
|
06:02pm Mar 20, 2004
I wrote "looks like a painting". This was my 1st reaction. Whether it was doco or not wasnt my consideration, HOWEVER it's intersting to me that the annolog/digital "debate" is so narrow in it's thinking. No doubt there will be great digital artists of future, and no doubt there have been marvellous digital images created now.
My frustration, if you will, is that so called "doco photography" remains extremely difficult to do well. So much has been done already so to come up with something unique and interesting is hard BUT more to the point, working with the REAL world, out there is relentlessly challenging. To get good photographs one has to be vulnerable to reality, vulnerable to the world.One needs verve and nerve for such intraction. My brothers and sisters of the digital lens generally remain closeted to intraction such as this and I'm afraid what they create I look upon with different criteia.
|
|
|
| Doco or what [message #958 is a reply to message #115 ] |
Fri, 27 May 2005 11:09 |
|
05:12am Mar 23, 2004
All art, irrespective of the medium used, is documentary. It is the clarity of the message that defines the artist.
|
|
|
| Documentary Photography in the Digital Age [message #959 is a reply to message #115 ] |
Fri, 27 May 2005 11:10 |
|
12:32pm Apr 12, 2004
Digital imaging may be the best thing to happen to documentary photography since the invention of flash powder. While this may seem blasphemous to some keep in mind that all photographs, even documentary photographs, are manipulations of facts. Digital imaging just makes them more honest.
The assertion that a "straight" documentary photograph represents an absolute reality or singular truth fails to acknowledge the role of both the photographer and the viewer in determining the meaning of the image. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that the very act of observing alters the reality being observed.
To paraphrase: photography, like natural science, "does not simply describe and explain nature; it is part of the interplay between nature and ourselves; it describes nature as exposed to our method of questioning." In this context the photographer brings to any experience a personal perspective determined in part by education, economics, politics, gender, ethnicity, race, culture, and tradition. The very same thing can be said about the person viewing the picture. Conscious or not, like it or not, any fact that we see depicted is a fact about ourselves. All of which raises the question, what exactly is being documented?
The definition of photography has evolved from being a simple photo-chemical reaction to that of a unique and complex visual language that relies on the illusion of truth to tell the most elegant lies. In discussing the impact of digital imaging on documentary photography we have to distinguish between those who recognize that all photographs lie and those who believe the lies. This is not to imply that the intention of the photographer is to deceive or mislead, but rather that a photograph is rarely what it first appears to be. No matter the stated intention, the fact of the matter is that a photograph is neither time nor space nor the thing itself and its truthfulness is something that we confer upon it.
Documentary photography, as it was defined in the early 20th century, served a noble but artless purpose once described as "an application of photography direct and realistic, dedicated to the profound and sober chronicling of the external world". This austere yet honorable paradigm, as far as it goes, has remained consistent for the last 75 years. But viewed through the Digital prism the potential of documentary photography becomes more inclusive and dynamic.
It can be used in traditional ways or it can be used to examine the meaning of experience in a non-linier fashion. The choice is ours. Digital imaging is a "method of questioning" that enables us to examine time and context in more than two dimensions, sometimes more than three, to create documentary photographs that reinterpret experience without changing the facts.
In the post Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Albert Einstein, Timothy Leary world of the 21st century we can no longer assign a single meaning to any image or limit its scope to an external world. Nor can we truly believe that it is possible to separate ourselves from the images that we make and pretend to be emotional eunuchs.
Photography is a fluid process that will always be influenced by advances in technology. Digital imaging is part of that historical tradition. This profound technology will change how all photographs are made from now on. What it doesn't change, however, is the human impulse to make pictures with cameras; to respond to life as revealed by light; to live in our own time and embrace the body knowledge that defines our age. It is important that we respect traditions, but we do not honor the past by living in it.
Chip Simone / Atlanta, GA
[Updated on: Fri, 27 May 2005 11:14]
|
|
|
| Faulty Logic [message #968 is a reply to message #115 ] |
Fri, 27 May 2005 11:46 |
Miller, Glenn McGaha
Messages: 2
Registered: April 2005 |
Junior Member |
|
|
06:49am Jun 7, 2004
| Quote: |
"...but will also stand in for the shame many feel for allowing themselves to be swayed in providing support for this war that indeed was not necessary."
|
While I'm thrilled to have found this website and will look forward to following it and participating in it, I must point out that the above quote represents a gross flaw in logic. Why should the debased actions of our de-Godded military sway us in our support or lack there of for a war that may or may not have been necessary?
You start out your article with an excellent premise: That the images of this war to date are not the work of what in the past was called the professional press. But deviating to assert your own political agenda that falls outside the scope of your own premise does you a disservice and harms your credibility as a thought provoking writer.
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 21 22:15:59 EST 2009
|
Members
Search
FAQ
Register
Login
Home
Two women with a red dress
