Can a camera steal someone's soul?

jan normandale

jan normandale

Film is the other way
Local time
4:54 AM
Joined
Aug 31, 2004
Messages
3,877
Location
on Location
View My Gallery
I remember as a kid seeing Hollywood westerns that showed superstitious Native Americans being afraid of 'science' and refusing to have their picture taken by a camera toting dude from the east.

I have just seen the Featured Photo on the front page of RFF, which is by Graksi, showing the face of a desperate and destitute young girl kneeling on pavement as people walk by. Did this shot take some of her soul?

Just asking.

Jan
 
I would think that it is more likely that the image stole some of the photographer's soul. If you walk around trying to "see" what is around you you can easily become immersed in your surroundings. You see your surroundings as images passing in time. The girl in Graksi's photo is desperate, but alive and experiencing something new today. This was just a passing moment for Graksi, captured as a memory to be shared, but lost as a reality.
 
No, the camera shows you what the photographer wants you to see and feel.


Todd
 
Only if the photographer is has the talent to show that Todd. The camera shows you what appears in front of it. By skillfully manipulating his tool, through composition, exact timing and all those other things we strive for, a photographer uses the camera to create that look and feel. I think this is a very hard goal to accomplish consistently for many, myself included.
 
Steal... no, and while the Native Indians were afraid losing something of themselves, I'll say that the picture in question has some of her soul (as in soul music, part of her life and being) and it's being preserved.
 
The camera can capture "soul" but not "spirit" in the ecclesiastical sense. Soul is the emotion and intellect etc. After a photo is taken, the person definately goes on with a soul. Now, if the "soul" was captured in total never to be regenerated by the person,there would be an awful lot of zombies stumbling around.
Too bad, I dig zombie chicks!
 
Last edited:
I would agree with Rover that taking a picture such as the Featured Photo by Graksi actually takes away from the photographer rather than the subject.

It is not the actual photograph but the actions leading up to it's taking and there after. Many photographers who work continually in war zones and disaster areas have had breakdowns in their own relationships and/or mental health later in their career or even gone as far as taking their own lives. I have nothing but respect for those that work in such arenas in order to make us aware through their pictures.
 
Seriously, I think making leaps from something that evokes an emotion is something that metaphysically has an effect a posteriori of the subject at hand for both observed and observant, but only felt by the observant. Overrationalizing an emotion as spiritual due to a lack of eloquence or, in the opposite case, assigning a spiritual value to something that cannot be explained due to an overflow of emotion, can lead to serious astigmatisms of reality.

I think that's why people reacted so violently during the first years of the invention of photography, and recently, to the ready access of digital manipulation software.
 
I’ve read some of the thoughts from the truly wonderful RFF crew. All well thought out. I picked this shot to ask this ‘question’, to see what the rest of the membership thought about the picture.

I posted because I was conflicted by this shot. We all have an obligation to tell a story about the human condition whether through portraits, street photography, landscapes. All these and others touch us all and I think that is why we are all here. I have taken shots of people who are sleeping on grates, culverts, tents in valleys next to expressways, under bridges. I do this to show that there is a problem. I don’t want to see these people treated like animals. I don’t know what the solution is maybe there is none. Still some people make it out of these traps, more do not.

I just refrain from photographing an individuals face for the world to identify with these situations. Used to be a time when a bad guy was shot once and you saw neither an exit wound nor death thoe. Just a shot and the guy would exhale, say his regrets and die. Now we seem to want to see the death throes, the exit wounds and blood flowing. Just look at our media. Ten years ago this was not shown on news now it is. People in grief crying over a lost family member, or loss of a home due to a fire. Am I better able to understand the situation when I see their face? I don’t think so. Something else is going on here. Is the shot for the photographer or the viewers? I’m not sure. I wish I was.

Every once in a while some of these shots cause me to think about photography.

That was why I posted the ‘abstract’ question.

Jan
 
Hey Francisco, no need to say 'sorry' that is reserved for Canadians. joke. I think I'm in a feisty mood too that must be why I put this post up. Maybe i'll be nicer when I wake up tomorrow. joke

Jan
 
Photographs have power (in varying degree) that can be used only for good or evil. 🙂 As a prospective subject may ask what the photo will be used for, there's obviously a legitimate concern from that point of view. Public usage (straight, manipulated, or juxtaposed) could be made embarrassing, and this is recognized in laws requiring signed releases for some uses. And copyright recognizes the connection to the photographer.

So there is clearly some continuing connection between live subject and captured image. Is it metaphysical? We might think of that as superstitious; like sympathetic magic in Voodoo. There is SOMEthing of the subject carried away from the scene in the recording medium. Whether that something is "stolen" would depend on one's belief that it is either "taken" or that it is "copied".

In any case, the power in photography is widely acknowledged... As I photograph people around town, seeking consent often raises that question about usage. And I recall one incident years ago on a back street in Izmir Turkey, when I snapped an elderly door-to-door knife sharpener plying his trade. He sent his young boy assistant over to me to raise objections, and I tried to communicate my respect for his wishes, and my good intentions.
 
One photograph by Margaret Burke-White really stole my soul. To this day, it still haunts me.

She went to Germany after the Armistice, and took photographs of civilian life. One of them is a kid, literally hugging a pair of new leather shoes. The expression on his face is just beyond joy and mirth: almost ecstasy, sheer happiness.

I was a kid myself when I saw that shot... and suddenly, a lot of things hit me at once, namely all the stuff that I used to take for granted... like new shoes (and I hated shopping for shoes with my parents). The sight of this boy, wearing torn clothes, and hugging a pair of shoes taught me something like compassion and understanding... and I haven't seen it again! 🙁

I guess that's another way in which your soul can be stolen.
 
Jan:
To me, one of the purposes we exist as photographers is to help document "the human condition". Perhaps, in doing so, we must try not only to capture the soul of our subjects, but to give a part of our souls as well (as has been pointed out by far more eloquent members than I!) I can coldly take a photo, but that coldness will show in the final shot. It's only when part of me is "given" to the subject that "soul" is given to the photo!
I cannot stand idly by and dispassionately record events around me and expect to pass on the pathos of a given moment, and I do not believe the members of this forum can either. From the posts I've seen in my short time on this wonderful forum, I believe you all are some of the most passionate photographers in the world! Passion NEVER comes without some giving of your soul to your subject and I look forward to becoming as passionate with my photography as all of you. Do you "lose" your soul with photos like that one? No, but you give a part of it and get back an indescribable momentary glimpse into the soul of another in return—a VERY fair exchange, if you ask me!
Rob "MacDaddy" White
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom