Although William Mitchell’s “How To Do Things With Pictures” was undeniably quite entertaining, I found Geoffrey Batchen’s “Ectoplasm: Photography in the Digital Age” to be a perfect last reading. There has been quite a bit of controversy surrounding digitally altered photography—for obvious reasons—but Batchen puts it in an ironically positive light surround that of death and deals with the matter in a fashion similar to how Walter Benjamin handles the situation in his time.
Aside from Batchen’s discussion of the effects of the digital era on photography, especially concerning its very existence, what was very interesting to me was his point about how “digital imaging is an overtly fictional process” (15). Batchen essentially suggests the return of the aura to photography as an art from because of digital processing: “digital processes actually return the production of photographic images to the whim of the creative human hand” (15). So what is so negatively viewed as the destroyer of photography’s ability to convey the truth is actually its aide in fulfilling what the medium has longed to obtain since Benjamin argued that it had itself eliminated in art—that of the aura.
I also found it quite entertaining, after having learned about the various ways photographs could be manipulated prior to digital processing, to read about how people considered these “pseudo-photographs” so detrimental to the reality of photography. It is interesting that most people do not know the history of photographic doctoring and do not realize that photography has survived these alterations and evolutions thus far. So why should it suddenly disappear? Like Batchen says, as long as there is a desire to take photographs, photography will remain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I also agree that the Ectoplasm by Batchen was a perfect ending to the readings. I thought that it was very interesting the discussion of digital photography and the way it has changed, is killing but also saving photography. My favorite line fromt the writing was; "digital processes actually return the production of photographic images to the whim of the creative human hand." I think that this is different than a lot of the reading we have done before that write of the death of photography even at its birth because of the lack of artistic affect like that of a painter. This speaks of death and life in terms of both photography and the outside world and a fact that even though the image has been changed, "we can at least be sure he or she was onve there in front of the camera." I think of this in terms of magazines such as Vogue where readers know that the images have been altered but take it as it is. As well as special effects in movies, we appreciate the "art" of it even though it was done on the computer and is so obviously fake. I agree with much of what Batchen said about photography and thinking of photography as "a visual inscription of the passing of time and therefore also an intimitation of every viewers own inevitable of passing." I think that all of the readings have really built up to this time, where i seem to agree that photography is a reflection of the world and also of humankind and the evolution of technology. With changes of technology come changes in photography.
Post a Comment