In a message dated 1/24/2005 2:58:23 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And I do agree that it is confusing that I sometimes switch from my perspective to the opponents. To simplify things: To me, a photograph is always a lie, since it always represents the photographers personal representation of something.
DagT ======== Just to confuse things... Your above statement implies that there is some objective truth. Something concrete "out there" that is true. And that subjectivity, by its very nature, because it is one person's viewpoint, is a lie. I believe, however, that there is no objectivity --no separate universal truth. What exists or doesn't exist or appears to exist "out there" must always be filtered through our own lens; passed through our own subjectivity. We cannot ever truly stand outside ourselves, outside our own heads, outside our own world view. If there is a universal concrete truth (which I do not believe), we cannot actually perceive untainted. We always perceive it through our own subjective experience. Whew. Probably not clear. (And I think I am losing myself in my own argument. :-)) OTOH, I think photojournalism as used in reporting, is a tricky area and anything that manipulates an image to present something that was not *apparently* there in the first place, could well be a "lie." In that case, the photography should admit any manipulation. Marnie ;-)
