Digital BW, The Print

I have been following this thread with interest for
some time now and I feel that I need to add my own two
cents worth. While I enjoyed the discussion regarding
the existence of an objective reality or lack thereof,
I feel that it is somewhat outside the scope of the
main area of contention.
I am sure that everyone would agree that the print is
not the subject, but is a representation of the same.
(Ceci n'est pas une pipe.) I think that those who are
arguing that it, in some sense, is, really mean that a
"good" print can create the same impression on our
visual sense as the subject itself. An "accurate"
color print viewed at the proper distance may be able
to do just that, but in all other circumstances this
"ideal" is not quite realized. In some cases, the
differences may be apparent only when reference is
made to the original. At other times it may be more
immediately obvious.
Photographers have always had access to techniques to
either increase or decrease the verisimilitude of
their product. Their use has largely been based on the
desire of the artist/photographer. No one can tell him
that he must strive to reflect reality or
alternatively that greater creativity and license are
required. That is his choice. The viewer has the right
to like or dislike the work.
Whether the photographer wishes to be a "purist" and
create an illusion of the reality as seen at the time
of the exposure or prefers to alter the image based on
his artistic vision, photoshop is only a tool. It may
make part of the job easier and more accesible to the
less trained individual, but all of the modern
technology that we have access to today (cameras,
scanners, printers, etc) has done the same.
The distinction between photographer and graphic
artist is rather artificial in my opinion. Should not
photography be considered a graphic art? One of the
criticisms thhat photography has always had to face is
that the photographer is merely a technician and the
"art" is produced by a machine-the camera. Many
photographers have responded to this by emphasizing
the ability to go beyond the acquisition of the image
and apply further "enhancements" or manipulations.
I contend that there is no defining line between the
photographer and the graphic artist. We are all image
makers and our images lie along various spectra from
"photorealistic" to "abstract", from "pure" to "highly
manipulated" and most importantly, but subjectively,
from "good" to "bad".

=====
Wayne D. Harrison

Yvan eht nioj.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
http://news.yahoo.com