Month: October 2017

This was a really intriguing read for me as I have a strong interest in the evolution into digital photography/editing and the effects that this has on the way images are produced along with how audiences are interpreting them. Joan explores the side of this in terms of Photoshop manipulating and the alteration of a digital image to look and represent something completely different from the subject that was originally photographed.

In terms of the writing style it seems incredibly relaxed which makes it easy to understand but also leaves it quite vague in places. “Keira probably asks herself why she should bother with surgery and uncomfortable silicone implants when the same results can be obtained with the wave of a digital wand” – I don’t quite understand the angle this is coming from or whether it’s just an unnecessary comment. From the eyes of an audience, viewed from a static specific medium, the digital enhancements may seem realistic, however this is simply a cover and does not represent her personal life or thoughts, hence why I don’t understand that quote.

I found ‘Beauty in Photography’ by Adam Roberts an incredibly interesting collection of Roberts ideas & conclusions into what beauty is, what defines it and how we know we have found it (whether this is in our own practice or through experience). At first, I was slightly confused due to the writing style not being what I am used to however he quickly backed up his arguments/explorations with examples and research sources which helped my understanding into what he was trying to communicate.

Whilst asking the question; how does art reveal Beauty or Form, Roberts talks about how art simplifies, how it is not equal to life. He uses composition as an example, and how on the set of a movie, they broke continuity rules to create a more beautiful composition. Whilst watching the rushes for this movie, nobody noticed the continuity change which was made in favour for composition, and arguably, beauty. “Art takes liberties, then, to reveal shape”. I found this quite interesting as it makes me ask the question ‘does the idea of beauty behind a certain content need to be changed for specific audiences?’

Roberts also goes on to discuss on how an image should feel in terms of how much work (/time?) has been put into it. He concludes, in mostly what is formulated from his opinions, that it should be a middle ground. It shouldn’t feel effortless, or perhaps ‘easy’ is a better word, but it shouldn’t feel like it was hard to do either. It should be somewhere in between, a middle ground. To me, this is almost the same as asking ‘How much of the physical photographic process do you want to be shown to the audience’, although this is just one element of what Roberts is referring to here.