Reading Response #7

It is interesting to consider the huge difference in terms of process with analog vs. digital photographs yet the relatively similar viewing experience we have with both types. The photographic history made such an impression on the medium that while the photographer has an abundance of possibilities in terms of manipulation (or even creating a stimulation completely detached form reality) photographers continuing to stick with the standard photographic language. I was surprised to learn that CGI decreases the quality of images to more closely resemble the “normal” photograph which suggests a connection to the real. Even as manipulations become more and more flawless, as a viewer we still associate the photograph with reality and other visual imaging uses this connection as a means to convince the viewer of the relationship to the real world. On the one hand we have become very photo savvy and cautious but on the other hand, we cannot shake the connections with reality which have persevered since the medium’s invention.

The panic instigated by the introduction of digital photography emphasizes the power of images. The scholars writing in the 1990s seemed to worry about the loss of realism as connected with the creation of identity. Photography is closely tied with human striving for order and understanding. The loss of realism would prevent the photograph from serving to contain and help the viewer understand the chaos of the world. Moreover, the viewer is put in a powerful position when viewing a photograph. The photograph provides the viewer with knowledge, order and the power of looking at perhaps what could not/ should not have been seen otherwise. As soon as the photograph becomes detached from reality, the viewer’s power is taken away. The world becomes more unordered because the viewer cannot distinguish between what is real and what is not. However, I think these concerns could be expressed at any point in photographic history. The photograph provides the comforting illusion of reality but as discussed in previous classes, arguably there is no such thing as photographic truth.

Q. Do we trust a poor quality photograph from a phone over a high quality photojournalistic photograph? Why?