Many classic and early photographers captured what they saw through photography; such as William Henry Fox Talbot, who captured nature through photograms. The process of creating photograms means that there is no way to create a fake, or untrustworthy photograph. A quotation from Louis Daguerre shows that there is no way to capture something, which is not in front of the camera. “Art cannot imitate [the daguerrotype’s] accuracy and perfection to detail” (Louis-Jacques-Mande Daguerre, “Daguerrotype” in Classic Essays, p12)”. This mood towards cameras and them being truthful is mirrored throughout the early and classic stages of photography. The ways of post-production were harder than what we have currently, but artists such as Susan Sontag still states that photographs show evidence. Her quotation “Photographs furnish evidence…A photograph passes for incontrovertible truth that a given thing happened. The picture may distort; but there is always a presumption that something exists, or did exist, which is like what’s in the picture” (Sontag, 1977; p5) gives a few different points on the subject. She clearly states that “photographs furnish truth” and show that a “given thing has happened” but also discusses the point that “a picture may distort”. This shows that possibly a photograph may not show what the photographer wants. This could be by personal experiences, a viewer who has been through a different set of experiences may see a picture differently to other audiences, but there are also other ways of distorting images.
Mainly, the classic photographers summarize the points into that the camera cannot lie, it is a machine and simply picks up what is in front of it. This leads us to believe that it is the photographer or audience that changes the truth of the photograph. Roland Barkes quoted talked about the operator, the spectrum and the spectator, in his essay titled (Camera Luicida 1980). If we cannot change the spectrum, the object, then the spectator or the operator must be the reason for the change and bend the truth of a photograph.
There are many styles of photography that can lead to the operator to change the image, such as editorial. This is to prevent upsetting and offending the viewers, however a more dramatic image may portray the message and increase sales. A BBC comment about this subject portrays this, “Audiences do believe that strong images should be used if they feel the subject demands it and if the editorial justification is clear to them” (Violence in News and Current Affairs, October 2010). However, these ‘strong images’ will often be cropped, objects will be remove and other types of editing, to make the paper more appealing to the audience. There are many images, however that changed the ‘spectators’ opinion on subjects, and often misled them. This is the case with the 1936 image, Migrant Mother by Dorothea Lange. This image was the most iconic, of the set she took, however one that seems “too perfectly staged” (Inside New York, March 3, 2010.) The image shows a mother, with two children who are looking away and one in her arms. The Conscientious Photography Magazine, May 2013, analyses the image and pose of the subjects deeper, “while the mother’s pose seems fairly natural, the two larger children’s has always struck me as a bit artificial. Children not familiar with a stranger might show their shyness, but these poses seem maybe a little bit too posed”. This is a statement that I agree with, if this image was documentary, should the subjects be aware of the camera and adjust their actions accordingly? The photographer, Lange, knew that the subjects being aware of the camera adjusted the image, so why did she publish it, when she had taken more natural shots? Another fact about this image is the post production on the mothers right hand thumb, it is slightly transparent and matches the pole, again suggesting manipulation. This doesn’t seem a big thing to be picking up, but does pose the question on what was she trying to remove?
Another type of photography that can change or alter the truth is advertising or commercial photography. This glamourizes and blurs the lines of reality of a product, such as food photography. Often the photographed subjects are inedible and often are post manipulated. Photographs used are often the best out of a large batch and will not show you the worst subjects, “I take between 25 and 50 photos per dish but post 2, maybe 3. Cookbook photographers would have professionally prepared dishes and likely take many, many more shots. Like agents, we only pick the most photogenic models” (The Messy Baker, August 6, 2009). She also posted a before and after post production shot, where she “adjust(ed) light, pump(ed) up the color, crank(ed) up the contrast or sharpen(ed) an image. With Photoshop, photographers verge on becoming plastic surgeons.” The end result was more appealing to the audience, but is this bending the truth of an image, or simply removing little mistakes that the photographer has made?
Total 1040 words.
References:
Louis-Jacques-Mande Daguerre – Classic Essays – Daguerrotype- p12.
Susan Sontag – On photography, - 1977 - p5
Roland Barks – Camera Luicida – 1880
BBC. (2010) – Violence in News and Current Affairs – available here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidance-violence-news/ - [Accessed 17/11/14]
Inside New York (2010) – Picturing Dorothea Langue’s Life and Work – available here: http://insidenewyork.com/2010/03/03/picturing-dorothea-langes-life-and-work/ - [Accessed 17/11/14]
The Conscientious Photography Magazine (2013) – Migrant Mother – available here: http://cphmag.com/migrant-mother/ - [Accessed 17/11/14]
The Messy Baker (2009) – The Truth about Food Photography – available here: http://themessybaker.com/2009/08/06/the-truth-about-food-photography/ - [Accessed 17/11/14]
