Read the section entitled ‘The Real and the Digital ’ in Wells, L. (ed.) (2015) Photography : a critical introduction . (Fifth edition.) London, [England] ; New York, New York: Routledge. pp.92–95. At: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucreative-ebooks/detail.action?docID=196 8918

• Does digital technology change how we see photography as truth? Consider both sides of the argument and make some notes in your learning log.
• Now that you’ve reached the end of Part One, reflect on what you’ve learned in your learning log or blog.
• What was your idea of documentary photography before you worked on Part One? How would you now sum it up?
• What are the differences between documentary, reportage, photojournalism and art photography?

It occurred to me whilst reading the section “Defining the real in the digital age” that the word “real” is very hard to pin down. What is real and what may be perceived are often very far apart even without digital or physiological intervention. A photograph that has not been manipulated or shot in a way to confuse or create misunderstanding; may still be misunderstood and perceived in many different ways. This is no different from the “real” world experience of human beings. We filter out things; we fill in gaps, which all makes for an altered reality on a day to day basis. Is photography any different, even in its purest sense?

With the on-going rise in the ability of people untrained in photography to take a great deal good quality images at almost any time and anywhere, we are inundated with the banal and the boring along with the informative and life changing aspects of the world around us.

Before photography we had art, everyone knew that the artist was creating the artwork and that it would not, and was not expected to be an exact visual representation of the subject matter, be it a portrait of a person or a landscape. It was accepted that the artist had some “artistic licence” in the production of the piece.

Photography was such a leap forward, an exact visual representation of an object could be formed. “The photograph never lies” has been a phrase deeply embedded in generations.

This of course wasn’t completely true, and manipulation was available during the developing process and other physical interventions. However I do think that the exact replication of a scene was one of the main aims of many of the early pioneers.

The lessons of the artist moved into photography and all the techniques used such as lighting perspective and framing were utilised to gain the meaning and look required by the photographer.

Liz Wells discusses a similar phenomenon occurring with the move towards digital photography.

“At first digital technologies simply copied those of traditional photography and there is still a sense in which a world of pixels and bytes has simply replaced that of chemicals and paper”(Wells, 2015)

Technology has allowed us to make this easier more efficient and crossed over into the realms of being unable able to distinguish between the “real” and the fabricated.

If we define truth as being an undistorted non manipulated photograph of say a vase then we can never be sure that a digital image has not be doctored in some way to change what is “real” without some provenance and evidence.

Technology has recently made it extremely easy to create a realistic photograph, which is often the product of 2 or more images brought together in such a way as to prove almost impossible to detect. It is usually only the presence of something impossible that makes it detectable as a manipulated image.

Technology has made us far more aware of the ability of photographs to change or skew the truth, but due to the vast number of images available it also means that an image being publicised to wider audiences can be exposed.

What was your idea of documentary photography before you worked on Part One? How would you now sum it up?

My idea of documentary photography before doing this part of the course was the standard definition, very much leaning towards the factual. It wouldn’t have included images such as those created by Paul Seawright in his series Sectarian Murders but strangely it might have included Sarah Pickering’s (2002-2005) series Public Order. It’s hard to describe why, but I feel it is in part to do with with the more stark journalistic style used by Pickering.

I would sum it up as being a style of photography more factual in its imagery, giving a true sense of an event or location but that can allow for some internal narrative, which may lead to a deeper understanding of the issue as a whole. I also feel that titles and context are an important part of documentary photography and should be used where there is a possibility of taking the viewer away from this issues that are being documented.

What are the differences between documentary, reportage, photojournalism and art photography

• Documentary: The reporting of or about real life issues, usually over a period of time and based around a specific subject (concrete or abstract) with a need for objectivity.
• Reportage: Tells a story, tries to convey the atmosphere of the event, as if the viewer were actually there
• Photojournalism: Photography often created to sit along side a newspaper or magazine piece. A quick short look at part of an issue without the underlying or surrounding issues being explored. Likely to be less objective.

Bibliography

Wells, L., 2015. Photography. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.