As usual your perspective is thoughtful and useful E. And it leads me to wonder to what degree craft defines an image? Or even more succinctly– I fear that among a disappearing but influential group, gear is a necessary condition in the way a media is classified.
How long has it been since videographers were considered photographers? I mean, for practical purposes, when was the last time that videographers entered their work in a photographic competition. And vice versa? Apparently the complexities of motion, sound, and editing have added more than degree to what video artists do.
About six months ago, I was virtually driven out of Canon Photography On The Net… a forum where I won considerable numbers of awards. Why? I posted this image with the caption… “This Is A Photograph”. And I posted it in the “Photo Sharing Section’ entitled, “People”.
Note, there is a POTN section entitled, “Still Life, BW & Experimental”. The response was immediate, negative, and overwhelming. I even received some sixty emails, all of which were negative, and many of which were rude, abusive, and personal.
And all of the responses were in answer to the title, which was taken as a question, challenge, or insult! And all felt that the title was wrong.
There is enormous discomfort among a segment of photographers concerning digital as opposed to chemical darkroom enhancement. Look we all know that pre-processing imposes itself at least as dramatically as post processing upon a final image. Still, there appears to be total acceptance of pre processing among those who want to define what photography is.
And there seems to be similar acceptance to chemical or mechanical post processing techniques regardless of their complexities. For some reason all of that comes under the umbrella of “natural” or even “classical” photography. However, pixel enhancement is viewed with suspicion at best, alarm at the extreme.
The word “manipulation” is the pejorative most easily employed to dismiss the photographic validity of virtual techniques which… “go too far”. And when pushed hard enough, it quickly becomes apparent that any virtual techniques are considered – like the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent. Hence even contrast and dynamic range adjustments are accepted grudgingly at best. While purists will accept that digital cameras produce images which they can consider to be photographs… They are VERY uncomfortable with allowing anything but virgin images to have that name.
And yet… every digital camera does some level of post processing while and even after it saves an image to disc. I’m reminded of purists who opposed any image cropping as inorganic… suggesting instead that only the dimensions imposed by optical and mechanical engineers upon the virgin frame could be considered to be acceptable photographs.
Which brings me, finally, to your response to my query, “Where should I upload this image?” The limiter here is in the category choices. And this category under discussion is entitled, “Classic Photography”.
If we can strip away any discussion of craft or gear, the image above is of an ancient alleyway at night. The composition is rigidly classical, along with the palette, shapes, and forms. It is almost preternaturally in sharp focus indicating a lot of attention to exposure trade-offs.
And there of course the technician enters the picture… quite literally. Because prior to digital post processing tools, that sort of exposure precision was simply not possible on any color film. That degree of simultaneous piercing of shadow and highlight detail was beyond the dynamic reach of film technology. It is the technician who understands that and it is through technical considerations that the composition, palette, forms, shape, and texture of this image result in any controversy over whether this image should be posted in a category called, “Classic Photography.”
Right?
And that means that either digital photographic artists will spin off from photography (or be drummed out of photographic circles) just as videographers have as they pursued there interests not just down the hall… but in entirely different buildings of the art world. Or it means that the Luddites will find themselves isolated behind walls of their own creation.
In fact, a professional photographer who lacks the technical competence to do what I did with that image up above will go broke in today’s world. Hence there is no debate among professionals as to whether that image is classic photography or not. They simply do not care.
And to the overwhelming number of amateur photographers who now employ varying degrees of digital techniques to achieve their goals…. The controversy over whether either of the images I’ve posted in this thread are photographs… that controversy simply does not exist. The answer is, “Who cares?”
Sooooo… I’d like to conclude that we have to determine whether something is photography and or classical photography, not on the basis of gear or technique, but on the basis of its content. And based upon that standard, there is no doubt now in my mind that the original image on the top of this thread… is “Classical Photography”.
