Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Photo vs. Time
The photographic image is entirely dependent on the concept of time. The whole idea of photography is to be able to capture an image in time with exact realism that a painting or other medium could not. They can not be compared in the sense of similarities and differences simply due to the fact that the photographic image is a derivative of time. The photo is a material object that only attempts to save a moment in time through visual means. Although the photographic image can capture a moment in time with 100% visual accuracy, it often times has difficulty reproducing the same level of thought or emotion that, say, a painting might. A certain level of desire and passion could be lost in the simplicity of pressing a button, whereas other artistic form require an extreme amount of manual effort to express things.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with your idea that photography is meant to be realism but I would say that visual accuracy is what is difficult to reproduce 100% instead of desire and passion. I think photographers generally strive to capture the emotions and story of an object rather then their visual accuracy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the idea that photography is meant to be about realism but I agree with Hayley on how it is very difficult to reproduce the image a 100%. Also how a photo is something that is meaningful to the person taking the photo and does not need to be a 100% accurate to the image that it is manipulating.
ReplyDeleteI think that while photography is simply capturing a single moment, it can still hold the emotional value and presence of a painting or some other medium. Artist like Sally Mann are capturing moments that seem to show personality and emotion. Her photos capture that person in that moment of time. While photography lacks the full story so do paintings, a photo can capture without the human influence, but a painting is not a full truth.
ReplyDelete