Photography and The Death of Reality

[kbg32]

"Before I go on, I’d like to share a story about Ansel Adams, relayed to me by one of his assistants, the talented John Sexton. Here goes: A man writes Ansel Adams a letter (condensed here): Dear Mr. Adams, I have your books. Your beautiful pictures of Yosemite inspired me to visit this National Park. However, when I got there I was disappointed. The park does not look like that."

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/photography_and_the_death_of_reality.shtml

 

[daveleo]

I like the John Lennon quote.
And, yeh "The Death of Reality" is kind of strong wording, but it gets your attention.

 

[telenous]

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away"
Philip K. Dick

.

 

[kbg32]

"There is nothing new except what is forgotten."

—Mademoiselle Bertin

 

[telenous]

“The advantage of a bad memory is that one enjoys several times the same good things for the first time.” 😀
Nietzsche

.

 

[mwoenv]

Paul Simon's "Kodachrome" made the same point in the 1960s.

I prefer representing reality but respect others who use photography for whatever they want to present. I went to a photo judging at a local professional photographers group recently (first time experiencing this) and to me the images were so overprocessed and color saturated that many of them looked more like paintings than photographs.

 

[mfunnell]

Paul Simon's "Kodachrome" made the same point in the 1960s.

I prefer representing reality but respect others who use photography for whatever they want to present. I went to a photo judging at a local professional photographers group recently (first time experiencing this) and to me the images were so overprocessed and color saturated that many of them looked more like paintings than photographs.

I very much take your point, and along the same lines: having looked at the LuLa article, am I the only one who liked the "real" (ie. before) photos rather more than the "creative" (ie. after; or HDRd) shots?

Just asking...

...Mike

 

[mfogiel]

I find HDR to be a particularly ugly and kitch part of colour photography, though admittedly it can have a merit at times, like in the first photo of this article.

 

[Spanik]

I very much take your point, and along the same lines: having looked at the LuLa article, am I the only one who liked the "real" (ie. before) photos rather more than the "creative" (ie. after; or HDRd) shots?

Just asking...

No, got the same feeling. For me the most "real" were the model ones. They were far more real than the hdr's.

Doesn't take much away from the point he makes however. But then there is documentary photography as well which is (or should be) not creating its own reality. So if your idea is to make art then yes, reality is dead. Otherwise?

 

[kbg32]

I can see the use of HDR when necessary, but I find it too over-the-top. Using some of the techniques to help process a difficult image, sure, but not as a means in and of itself.

This article kind of brings to mind the battle of Adams vs. Mortensen. Adams thought Mortensen's work was the product of the devil. I find it interesting the quote of the writer of the letter, in which the writer does not find the reality of Yosemite to be what he finds in Adams work. Adams imagery was as over processed as the pictorialist imagery of Mortensen.

Goes to show, people who tend to yell loudest, who feel they know the "truth", have the most to hide.

 

[Bill Clark]

What is real and what is an illusion?

Red to you maybe green to me.

What I see is what I see.

Is it the reality you see?

Is it real?

 

[mfunnell]

No, got the same feeling. For me the most "real" were the model ones. They were far more real than the hdr's.

Doesn't take much away from the point he makes however. But then there is documentary photography as well which is (or should be) not creating its own reality. So if your idea is to make art then yes, reality is dead. Otherwise?

I have no problem, in theory, with what he's done - it's just that it's not to my taste. More power to his left elbow if that's what works for him.

I don't mind altering the presentation of "reality", however defined, it's just that I prefer the alteration to be more subtle, rather than smacking me in the face. But that's just my personal preference, not some kind of rule, and I understand that my preferences seem somewhat unfashionable these days. I hold to them, nonetheless. I was simply asking if others might see things more the way I do (perhaps in the hope that, while unfashionable, I might not be alone).

...Mike

 

[Steve M.]

"However, when I got there I was disappointed. The park does not look like that."

Quite correct. It was never meant to be his reality, it was Mr. Adams' reality. And anyone that has ever shot LF knows that it didn't look like that 2 minutes after the shutter was closed. It was a moment in time that was captured, and will never be repeated. Expecting the impermanent to continue is an excellent recipe for suffering.

It's like the bumper sticker I once saw that said..."Life is so much better now that I gave up hope". My wife interprets this as a negative statement, but it's actually a Zen lesson. Most of our disappointments in life stem from expecting one thing and getting something else instead. When you don't expect something, how can you be disappointed?

 

[willie_901]

This LuLu essay is very disappointing because it is so superficial.

The irreducible dilemma that every photograph can tell the absolute truth and lie at the same time is dismissed in a two-sentence paragraph.

Gratuitous tone-compression is the quick and dirty way to blend exposures. And this look is a common as dirt.Just push the mouse in the right boxes in the correct sequence a couple of times. Doe the author really think LuLu's readers have not seen a set of exposure bracketed images before? The same goes for the staging in the scene with model.

Blending bracketed exposure such that more than the 90% of viewers don't realize the image is blended requires much more care and effort.

Using lenses with large angles of view when you have the option of standing further away from the subject also causes avoidable visual distractions. When you don't have the option of moving further away stitching images from a lens with a smaller angle of view solves the problem. But it does require more time and effort.

Yet the author encourages "not to be afraid to follow your heart when it comes to digital enhancements". Good advice if your heart is lazy.

Even worse is the effect of gratuitous manipulation on the tension between content and form (the classic Winogrand "Monkey Problem"). When the departure from reality overwhelms composition, the viewer is being cheated. The highly manipulated photograph appears interesting for about three seconds, which is all the attention it deserves.

I like the quotes from the previous contributors in this thread. Pictorialism became popular about 120 years ago. Most comtemporary photographic deviations from reality are entirely derivative (even though their practitioners may not realize it).

 

[Out to Lunch]

Chicken soup philosophy and ugly pictures.

 

[Coopersounds]

What is real and what is an illusion?

Red to you maybe green to me.

What I see is what I see.

Is it the reality you see?

Is it real?

this has long been a thought of mine.

 

[grdglass]

What's next? An article supporting Snapseed or any other kitschy art filter, claim it's okay, and call it "good" photography?

 

[Steve Bellayr]

Ansel Adams photographed a world that no longer existed. Consider Adams' world vs. the world of the WPA photographers.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I find HDR to be a particularly ugly and kitch part of colour photography, though admittedly it can have a merit at times, like in the first photo of this article.

90% of HDRed pictures shows distasteful misuse. Like first picture in the article. 🙂

 

[Tom A]

My feeling is that reality is highly over rated - hence I shoot black and white - which in itself is "unreal" for most people.
Unless you shoot 3D, a photograph only represents a 2 dimensional image of what is a 3 dimensional world - which is unreal anyway - unless you are one-eyed.
HDR is fine, as is "hyper realistic paintings' etc. Just another way for someone to express themselves - and often to show off that they know how to do it.