Technology and the emergence of computers transform what photography means to be traditionally. When Ritchin said about the “fluidity of the digital”, he meant the ability to manipulate the imaging, and the possibility to change and alter an image that used to be thought as unchangeable. Therefore, photography isn’t necessarily objective; it doesn’t capture what a photographer really sees. An example of this can be seen widely on social media, where online participants posted photos that are photoshopped. Selfies of an influencer on the internet are possibly all being “upgraded”, with the app auto function of “Mei Yan”, which gives users bigger eyes, smoother and whiter skin, and shaper chins. Moreover, after the selfie is being taken with the auto beautify function, the picture can still be upgraded even more. Face and body shapes can be altered. Skin tone can be changed. One can even put makeup on the face in the pictures.
In my opinion, photography is a subjective thing from its nature. It tells a story through the eyes of the photographer, which means that it carries a perspective, which is partly but not as general. The angle the photographers posit their lens decides how we view the story following their perspectives to see the world. Furthermore, that photo is able to be edited makes photography even more subjective and be further away from reality. Especially when the one who manipulates the photo is not the one who takes the photo. It is like rumors: when A tells B something(may be the truth or heavily biased), what B tells C can be totally different from what A intends to tell B. Then what really happened? It’s difficult to know unless we really see it with our own eyes. The same can be found in different media that serves as the information channel like books, videos, VRs… The information is conveyed through the eyes and hands of its creators. There is a point of view that hardly is the reality of a situation in general. Unless we are on the scene and view it with our own eyes, it is hard to know the truth.
Leave a Reply