"Tim Atherton" <tim@...> writes: > > You missed the point. It's a fact that a LOT of photography is about > > accurate reproduction of a scene. What you took a picture of, is what you > > took a picture of, plain and simple, in and of the image it self. What it > > represents is something possibly different, but it's at least accurate to > > what the eye saw. We're not talking about crime scene photography here, > > which is not related, in my opinion, to this discussion. > > Austin, > > the point is that photography can never accurately reproduce a scene (at the > most banal level, all photographs arrest the flow of time, extracting a > fraction of a second - a fraction far to short for the eye to register - and > so the instant the photograph is taken, it becomes unreal and inaccurate - a > construct). The photograph you produce is merely an attempt to represent > what you, the photographer, saw. To insist it is (or can be) an accurate (or > true) reproduction is simplistic at best and certainly inaccurate. This is both completely true and completely false. I'll certainly grant all the obvious ways in which a photo is an abstraction from reality, and not the reality itself. Frozen moment, chosen angle, in B&W loss of color, and so forth. These are the senses in which it is completely true. Nevertheless, one of the big reasons photography is important *in some kinds of art* is because the image produced is directly and mechanically mapped from reality. It's still a map, and the map is still not the territory. But a photograph differs from a painting in this key way, and this distinction affects the *reactions of people* viewing the works of art. Meanwhile, bird books are very often illustrated with paintings rather than photographs because the paintings give a better representation of the *real* animals. Life is strange. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@... / http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ John Dyer-Bennet 1915-2002 Memorial Site http://john.dyer-bennet.net Dragaera mailing lists, see http://dragaera.info
Message
Re: [Digital BW] Very cool B&W Lightjet prints
2002-09-17 by David Dyer-Bennet
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.