Documentary and photojournalism photography is depicted as telling the viewer who and what is happening at a particular point in time. As a viewer, we want to know the accurate information that is being told through this picture. However, depending on the photographer's personal point of view, the way we see the image may be altered.
"The simplest and most obvious test of authenticity is to ask whether what is in front of the lens to be photographed has been tampered with, setup, or altered-"
Many techniques can be used to change our view of an image that may not be telling the whole story. I was interested to know in the reading that 'authentic documentary' was implicated stating no cropping was allowed, and the whole image was to be recorded, and that using something so simple as a flash could alter an image and that natural should be used.
The argument however over what is authentic and what is artistic still stands. Is documentary work meant to be a self-expression and how the artist wants to depict an event, or should it be a natural and unbiased and just a clear-cut image? This may always be an ongoing discussion because people, whether they document it to the world or not, will have an opinion on a subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment