What was taken for granted in the past as truth – a photographic representation of reality – is according to Wells increasingly questioned because of ‘digitisation and reworking of the photographic image’. ‘in recent years, developments in computer-based image production and the possibilities of digitisation and reworking of the photographic image have increasingly called into question the idea of documentary realism.’ – (Wells, 2009 – pp. Wells acknowledges this kind of debate by attributing it to the realm of digital manipulation (I would assume Funch shot the images contributing towards the composites on a digital camera). On the other side of the ethical fence artists might appreciate this reduction of the conditions of optical perception as it allows not only the interesting juxtapositions of people but brings into question some of the authority traditional photojournalism has in photography. Funch has just reduced another of these conditions, perhaps to highlight this disparity of realism in photography. They would have a strong case although, as noted earlier, Eco states that only some of the conditions of optical perception are reproduced. Traditional photojournalists would probably argue on the ethics side that such photographs tamper with the real and are not a ‘true’ representation of a time that has passed as the juxtapositions of the people have changed. The difference then between it being an alternate reality and realistic is the juxtaposition of the various people in the scene with each other. However, they do document the people who passed through particular scene albeit at different times. © Peter Funch (2008) Memory LaneĬlearly the photographs produced by Funch do not represent reality as we know it rather a kind of satire of it. This I believe is where ethics become important. Yet because of the established aesthetic conventions employed (landscape compositions), the viewer has to question the authenticity of each photograph. Looking closer it becomes obvious that the people overlaid in the scene are too similar to one another in terms of clothing/activity and that the scene is not a realistic rendition after all. All the while Funch plays with our notion of authenticity as the photograph at first glance often seems realistic. This interrupts the indexical properties of the photograph because things are changing in the image world that didn’t change in the real world. For example Peter Funch produces a composite of a scene (with the same framing and therefore remaining a realistic representation) but overlays the scene with different people who appeared in that scene over a period of days or even weeks. Some photographers break down this notion of realism associated with photography in their work. (1982) ‘has commented that the photograph reproduces the conditions of optical perception, but only some of them.’ Eco indicates that although photographs are iconic to their source, they only share some of the characteristics of optical perception associated with seeing. Because of their indexical properties photographs retain a sense of authenticity. The first area that captured my interest was the part The Photograph as Document where Wells talks in depth and quite thought-provokingly about photographs’ relation to reality. Therefore I decided to comment only on the first section as this was the area of the book I gained the most from. While I got the reason for this, it would have been nice if the book had remained at a consistent level of readability. On the other hand, understandably the book became hard to read as it began to delve into many specific debates concerning photography. This was because it introduced many complex ideas and elaborated on them, without becoming too convoluted. I enjoyed reading Liz Wells’ (2009) Photography: A Critical Introduction, particularly the first section: Thinking About Photography.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |