This
was a hefty chapter to take in, because it really addressed a lot of huge
topics, which could be digested and solely debated over during an entire
semester. So, I will choose to highlight only a couple of the facts and ideas
that particularly struck me about this passage, including:
1.
The
significance of stock photography in the age of digital photography and the
transition to digital archiving. This fact is astounding: “It has been
estimated that if Corbis scanned every image in the archive it would take 25
years.” The point of an ‘edited history’ (which ones are chosen to keep in
circulation) comes to mind, and Wells addresses this question. This only
highlights the idea that photography helps to shape history, which is something
we have discussed in class (especially in terms of war photography). In general, stock photography is made to be recombined- like building blocks used to tell a certain story. This also kind of relates to an edited history- a way to manipulate images, to then in turn convince the masses of a certain 'believable' narrative.
2.
Because
of the changing relationship we have to the photographic interface, and how
easy it is to delete photos, a certain part of our own individual past might
much easily disappear. “…images that might have been valued in retrospect, are
now rapidly consigned to oblivion before history and nostalgia can do their
work” (337).
3.
Photos
have a deep emotional significance, and this should be more openly recognized
(beyond the technical qualities). Wells draws upon a lot of really cool ideas
from Kevin Robbins to highlight this point, which is essentially that we are
afraid of the transition to digital photography because it threatens the
humanist perspective to photography. “The perceived threat is to our subjectivity…”
(322).
4. There
is no such thing as an unmediated photograph! This point is highlighted on page
321, in the introduction to “The Humanist Response”. I thought that was a cool
way to end the reading in Wells, because it reminded me of the point of
Gladwell’s article we read the first day of class. Photography is not a set a
facts, but a set of deliberate, subjective choices - always. “Digital
technology does not subvert ‘normal’ photography because ‘normal’ photography
never existed [Manovich 2033: 245]” (321).
2 comments:
I was also drawn to the quote, “Digital technology does not subvert ‘normal’ photography because ‘normal’ photography never existed" when reading this chapter. It is interesting to me that throughout history artists are always challenged when a new technology or movement comes along, even though it is usually for the betterment and advancement of the medium of the art. I suppose no matter how beneficial or door-opening a new technology is, it will always be challenged because people do not like change.
In reference to #4: Funny how things come around full circle like that. I believe that photography will always be just like it is described in this chapter and by the Gladwell reading. Photography will always be subjective, no matter what the subject matter is. There is always a conscious effort to press the button and release the shutter, the subject matter even if it is seemingly an afterthought. But that deliberate push of the button that human standing behind the camera making the choices is what make photography art isn't it?
Post a Comment