I can’t grip rational leverage on conceptual composites that look like photography but really aren’t, even though they defy any other category and have original photographic components. What are these things? Common sense says they’re illustrations yet they’re not freehand creations.
On the other hand, I know what feels real. When I see a photograph I don’t have to speculate about manipulation, my senses care less because they’re consumed by examination and filled with emotion. Once I whiff movement too far from photo-authenticity, I sense too much personal jurisdiction lost over interpretation; I begin to feel as manipulated as the image.
Great questions about the photographer's role in the digital age. Maybe a little too soon for answers, but these things must be in the forefront of our creative minds.
I love Bruce's PermissionToSuck blog. Make it a must read.
No comments:
Post a Comment