I really want to explore new perspectives with photoshop. Erik Johansson points out that a crucial part of altering your photo requires a combination of imagination and planning.
This is a subject with which I've been concerning myself with a lot since last semester, about the artistic viability of heavily photoshopped images within the realm of photography. More specifically, is it still photography? I go back and forth in my answer to this question. On one hand, photo manipulation has been around since photography and is essentially inseparable from photography. One can view photoshop as the next step in technical manipulation, simply a new tool. On the other hand, it introduces the idea of an un-trustable image, something that is somewhat troubling, at least in my mind.
Photography is separated from other visual arts in that is holds a far deeper root in reality than any other. Paintings, drawings, digital media, they're all manufactured from an artist in one way or another, using a specific medium. Photography, however, is based on a very real representation of reality, and this increased veracity is what gives photography some of its more unique abilities to speak and represent issues in a closer way. Namely, when we recognize something as a photograph, we associate it not as an abstraction or a craft (as we may do with a drawing) but with its unique, real-world source material. These associations are (in my opinion) more powerful and accessible than those made in other visual media. This idea of high-veracity is limiting in some ways, but expanding in others.
My main problem with high manipulation in photoshop is the loss of the veracity, and thus the connection to reality that allows such unique expression. Of course, its possible to use photoshop in more limited and traditional ways.
I'm not saying my more 'purist' ideals are any superior to the high-manipulation technique, im simply saying that, for me, something is lost , but that doesn't mean something also isn't gained.
This is a subject with which I've been concerning myself with a lot since last semester, about the artistic viability of heavily photoshopped images within the realm of photography. More specifically, is it still photography? I go back and forth in my answer to this question. On one hand, photo manipulation has been around since photography and is essentially inseparable from photography. One can view photoshop as the next step in technical manipulation, simply a new tool. On the other hand, it introduces the idea of an un-trustable image, something that is somewhat troubling, at least in my mind.
ReplyDeletePhotography is separated from other visual arts in that is holds a far deeper root in reality than any other. Paintings, drawings, digital media, they're all manufactured from an artist in one way or another, using a specific medium. Photography, however, is based on a very real representation of reality, and this increased veracity is what gives photography some of its more unique abilities to speak and represent issues in a closer way. Namely, when we recognize something as a photograph, we associate it not as an abstraction or a craft (as we may do with a drawing) but with its unique, real-world source material. These associations are (in my opinion) more powerful and accessible than those made in other visual media. This idea of high-veracity is limiting in some ways, but expanding in others.
My main problem with high manipulation in photoshop is the loss of the veracity, and thus the connection to reality that allows such unique expression. Of course, its possible to use photoshop in more limited and traditional ways.
I'm not saying my more 'purist' ideals are any superior to the high-manipulation technique, im simply saying that, for me, something is lost , but that doesn't mean something also isn't gained.