A photograph is a lie
A photograph is a "lie" because it reproduces a static moment, and life happens in a dynamic dimension. We are not conscious of this unbroken succession of moments, the picture freezes. What interpretation can make one of those moments as a constituent part of the experience "exciting" that is our daily lives? Surely, we have no ability / tools to evaluate such a singularity. (...) What we can have intuitions of existence in a world with only two dimensions? And because they often say: - I do not like to see in the pictures. I'm evil. Is it just for cultural reasons or because the picture also depicts an abnormal situation for our dynamic nature?!
The paradigm of non-acceptance / non-recognition, a picture of what happens before we can call "a moment of transition" moment of transition between two moments "Normal" is nothing more than a grotesque pose, resulting from a grimace on the face or any ridiculous position of the body (certainly, once again, the cultural constructions mark difficult place to discuss this issue).
And if a photograph is a lie, a monochrome photograph will be a double "lie" because we do not live or see the world this way. It's easier to win the admiration of the spectator with a photo to B & W than with a polychromatic. This is because the R & B recreates another world, a world that does not exist. Hence, too, our natural predisposition to enjoy / appreciate the picture monochrome instead of color, "just" plays the real (in terms of how we see it). It is easier to photograph B & W than color! Cause awe and wonder just playing the real, is notorious.
efe. 02/04/2007 16:50 in Photography Channel Forum
If I point the machine to a person, I get a quizzical look or turn away and face themselves. But if I point to a crowd, smiled and crowd each other to ensure guidelines. Why?
0 comments:
Post a Comment