on 2005/02/09 8:19 PM, Moose at olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I propose that all 'serious' or 'thoughtful' photography is certainly
> graphic design to a greater or lesser degree.
That's true, but logic does not support drawing the conclusion that there is
no difference along this continuum.
To me the issues are:
- To what extent is the photographer *trying* to tell the truth?
(Even if they compose, remove irrelevant distractions, burn/dodge,
etc, and of course it's a judgement whether these things interfere
with the essential truth of what's shown.)
- If there has been a serious departure from reality, has the viewer
been informed? If not, are they liable to draw important conclusions
from the image that are wrong? That is, would they feel lied to if
they found out?
Fiction can of course tell truths deeper than non-fiction sometimes.
Picasso's Guernica was probably as truthful as photographs in a different
way. Strict factuality is not really the point, and it's probably impossible
for mortals as we have only our own viewpoints to interpret from.
(These are my opinions and I reserve the right to change them without
notice. Liability will be limited to replacement with fresh unexposed
opinions. :-) )
Andrew
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|