Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/11/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 12:15 AM -0500 11/7/03, Phong wrote:
>Surely you do not assume just because someone
>says that some rules are silly, that they
>think all rules are silly ?
>
>I must say some people on this list seem to only
>see in high contrast B&W with very little tonality
>changes in the different shades of gray.
>
>- Phong
>
Exactly!
If we have 'reality' at one end of the scale, (and for this
discussion we shan't go further into what 'reality' is), and a quick
surrealist pencil sketch at the other, the photography falls
somewhere in between. Photography will never come very close to
reality, yet might have more attributes of reality than the sketch.
Where we place documentary photography is a convention, and it
obviously varies among this group, but it is merely a convention and
not an absolute.
Photography is not reality nor can it truly represent reality. It is
a faint simulacra.
I would postulate that to approach a representation of reality we
might produce a 360° immersive sphere photograph, or better yet,
movie, of the highest resolution possible, complete with sound. In as
accurate colour as we can manage. Even here our one chosen position
takes away from reality and starts editorializing.
We use an imperfect imaging system , we take away from reality and
start editorializing.
We make still pictures of only an instant or specific, chosen,
pictorially 'significant' moments, we take away from reality and
start editorializing. This is where
We use a regular focal length available to Leica users and photograph
only with a small angle of view, we take away from reality and start
editorializing.
We use high speed, grainy film , we take away from reality and start
editorializing.
We use B&W , we take away from reality and start editorializing.
We interact with the scene or subjects in _any_ way , we take away
from reality and start editorializing.
A number of the above steps will be chosen based on societal,
political and propagandist criteria.
We are now quite far from reality, and yet some would say that this
is true 'documentary photography'. It is if you define it as such,
and then only if others accept it as such. 'Documentary' is actually
misleading, as it implies something which it can't deliver. Better
would be 'Type D photography', as that is less loaded.
In the end, there is nothing wrong in doing all the above, and having
a propagandist position that you editorialize from, but in all
honesty you must face the fact that you have this position, and that
it is an arbitrary one to all others apart from yourself.
Another photographer might accept all the above limitations,
recognize them and visualize in the scene in front of him a situation
that will better explain his point of view than what he actually
sees. If this involves asking someone to do something that they
normally do, but wouldn't in the time available to the photographer,
the photographer might reasonably ask his subject to do that action,
and in so doing produce a photo that might be more accurate to the
situation and his position than one that just has the room with
nobody in it (a scene with less intervention).
Honesty is not possible if you are blind to the factors influencing
your decisions. In the end, nobody can thus be truly honest as none
of us are truly aware of all factors, and therefore it is even more
ridiculous to call someone dishonest because he/she has chosen a
different way to express his/her view of things than you.
The best way to approach honesty is to start out being as aware as
possible of the choices you make.
- --
* Henning J. Wulff
/|\ Wulff Photography & Design
/###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
|[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html