Pete Askew
Admin
Or shall we say, selective with the truth? 
Deep thoughts for a Tuesday evening...
- Thread starter John Allen
- Start date
Rense Haveman
Well-Known Member
Ah, now there you've got me. Photographers - compulsive liars the lot of them!
Don't tell me you didn't know already?
Rense Haveman
Well-Known Member
Disclaimer: not from my own heritage, stolen from the world wide web, with the motto: better nicking good than inventing bad....
John Allen
Well-Known Member
Rense, very strong argument with many valid points. I can tell you put some time and effort into that comment. There is, however, one sticking point and it is central to the discussion. You argue that a photograph from a digital camera remains a photograph no matter how much it is changed. I disagree on that one point. What you are describing is not so much a photograph. It is a computer file - a digitized image. Not all digital images are photographs and not all photographs are digital images. You seem to be arguing that once a photo is digitized, whether shot with a digital camera or scanned, it remains a photo down to the last byte. Your argument that the digital file remains a photograph, no matter how much it is modified, breaks down after a certain point. What if you copy and paste a portion of the image into a new file and then give that file a different name? Do you still have a photograph? What if you create a file and give it the same filename, does it become a photograph because of the name? What if you merge multiple computer files, some of which aren't even images, into one image? Is the result an example of photography?
Is this? -
Is this? -
Rense Haveman
Well-Known Member
Well, this is exactly the fuzzy grey inbetween.... caused by the fact that the photo isn't a real photo on paper, but consists only of zeros and ones.... I don't know. Does it matter? There is photography in it, ant the resulting picture/poster is rather tasteful and reminds of times gone by, and in the same time looks forward to the future.... I'd say it is art, and it is induced by some photography....
If I would come by this poster in real life, I would look a bit closer, think that I like it, and walk on.... I would never ask myself how it was made. I is of not interest, is it? Not when it is good. Nor when is lousy....
Sorry?
If I would come by this poster in real life, I would look a bit closer, think that I like it, and walk on.... I would never ask myself how it was made. I is of not interest, is it? Not when it is good. Nor when is lousy....
Sorry?
Rense Haveman
Well-Known Member
Oh, and of course you are completely free to disagree. I like it when people disagree, and still share the same passion....
Pete Askew
Admin
As I recall, this poster is even more controversial than that. Wasn't it 'acquired' from a journalistic image and then used as the basis of a computer rendering that got turned into a screen print?
John Allen
Well-Known Member
You remember correctly. He tried lying about it and that didn't go over well. He ended up on trial over the denial and his attempts to hide the document trail. I don't remember how the trial came out.
Pete Askew
Admin
The original shot was by Mannie Garcia and the artist, Shepard Fairey used it as the basis of the poster and then lied and tried to hide the trail. He eventually pleaded guilty in court and was given 2 years probation, 300 hours community service and a fine of $25,000. As I recall, this exact scenario was one of the reasons why the 'orphan works' element of the proposed revision to copyright laws was so strongly opposed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_"Hope"_poster
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_"Hope"_poster
Ivar Dahl-Larsen
Well-Known Member
I want to butt in, as my butt gets sore sitting here reading all these comments. Wonderful ones but deviating from the initial question along the line. So what did John ask? Well look again. " Will photography, as Ansel Adams or W. Eugene Smith knew it cease to exist?"
No it won't ( my take on it ), and Pete's first answer explains it all. And after that, the discussion takes all directions. Fun and interesting, but not true to the initial question. What is art. Nobody knows and some may like the mother, others like the daughter and some even find fancy in both. I guess I am a simple minded person
I am more interested in the decisive moment, performing in making the image and what it gives ME. ( Here also included any alleged photograph I see ). Go out there folks and enjoy or stay inside and enjoy
Rense Haveman
Well-Known Member
But(t) Ivar, John did not ask one question, there are more.... And the one marked by you as his initial one was in fact his last one...
And the one marked by you as his initial one was in fact his last one...
Pete Askew
Admin
These people who pick and choose eh!
Ivar Dahl-Larsen
Well-Known Member
Remember I am short sighted, as many here.But(t) Ivar, John did not ask one question, there are more....
Similar threads
