Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Down

Author Topic: When is a Photograph a Cheat?  (Read 34793 times)


  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3123
Re: When is a Photograph a Cheat?
« Reply #100 on: December 01, 2011, 01:39:17 pm »

We then assume that all photos are real in a way that other art is not.
I think we find it difficult to escape immediately responding to a photograph as-if it were a frozen reflection.

Sometimes as-with a distorting mirror we experience both the apparent reality and unreality of the photograph; other times we only experience the apparent reality and, without further examination, will not discover that we're looking into a mirror-world.

Defining cheating is not easy and depends on the photographer's intent and our conventions and expectations.
"When does a photograph document reality. When is it propaganda? When is it art? Can a single photograph be all three?"

I don't think anyone really expects advertising and glamor photographs to represent reality and we accept a great deal of manipulation in these.
In general, I don't think we realise just how distorted those photographs have become. In general, I don't think we get the opportunity to see just how distorted those photographs have become.

2. Take the original photo and clone out the mess--is this a cheat?
Mark Schacter's essay was somewhat defensive on this point. We might read PERSON 1's "Isn’t that sort of cheating?" as - isn't that sort of cheating other photographers who actually did the hard work to be there for those fleeting moments when the landscape was luminous.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2011, 03:29:35 pm by Isaac »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Up