The Truth of the Photo Essay

Helen Byrne
11/11/14

So the question is; can the camera lie? Or is it the instrument that can evidence the truth? The theory behind it all allows us to question its accuracy and makes us reflect upon previous artists work and the arts of today.

We initially think that images present belief or trust that shows the true and unbiased story, as the camera has captured it as evidence. However with these feelings towards photography, it makes us question the truth of the camera when reflecting upon manipulation within the advertising, marketing and photojournalistic industry and just how far they go with representing the truth.

When looking back at the history of photography and its theory, Louie Daguerre produced the first ever way of recording something photographically, this was then called the Daguerreotype. The process of which to record an image was to place a silver-plated sheet of copper within a large camera box, then expose the image to daylight, to be developed in mercury flames and stabilized with salt water. From this you believe that this method was a truthful way of evidencing what we couldn’t see by using the nature of daylight to produce the image, as nature nor the process of development of the image using chemicals cannot manipulate or change the scenario. This is similar to the work of William Henry Fox Talbot as he produced photograms by placing an object on light sensitive paper and exposing it to light, therefore all he is doing is recording what he has seen, showing the truth of the photo and resembling the accuracy of the camera.

However Malcolm Daniel states in his study of ‘The Invention of Photography’ that “Photography had a dual character – as a medium of artistic expression and as a powerful scientific tool” of which Daguerre produced photographic evidence for both ideas. This creates controversy with the idea of the truth of the camera, well is it the camera or is it the artist behind it that can manipulate the truth? Is the camera just a machine for which the photographer uses?

Allan Sekula argued that Photography had no specific content, but was suspended within art and science which has been floating around for decades similarly to what Daguerre was practising. He states in his essay ‘The Traffic of Photographs’ that “we are invited to dance between the photographic truths and photographic pleasures with very little awareness of the floorboards and muscles that make this seemingly effortless movement possible”. This suggests that the camera is the tool of which ‘we dance around’ and used to bend and play with the truth suggesting that the camera is just the process or machine of which to record something that they had seen. Is it actually the artist behind the camera that can manipulate the meaning of an image?

Roland Barthes is another artist which similarly agrees with Allan Sekula about how the camera is the machine that we use to record something, this is quoted from his book ‘Camera Lucida’, “What the Photograph reproduces to infinity has occurred only once: the Photograph mechanically repeats what could never be repeated existentially.” This basically means that the photographs authenticate past experiences and gives us proof of what has happened. He also stated that "Photography never lies: or rather, it can lie as to the meaning of the thing, being by nature tendentious, never as to its existence," so what he is trying to say is that to explore or to record something it can’t lie, but where it is not truthful is the person who is recording it. All the camera can do is document and evidence something to say it was there.

Therefore is it the photographer? Are they playing with the truth through camera controls and imagery features such as perspective and composition or through manipulation like double-exposures, or though post production. Or can it just be how the viewer or how the subject views the image as to whether the image is telling the truth or not, we can, as an individual twist the meaning of the image just by our own opinions on what it is that is trying to be portrayed.

Manipulation is a technique that is used more frequently within today’s society due to the time differences and era and what technology was around. However in camera manipulation was around back when Daguerre created his daguerreotype, he would have been able to use composition and framework to manipulate your view of a subject this therefore supports the idea of the photographer manipulating an image and that the camera is telling the truth, it is how it is photographed and perceived as to whether the image is truthful.

Sontag supports this as she uses photos as evidence for the wildest of ideas or even for documentary subjects to make it believable, and has stated in her Book on Photography that “Photographs furnish evidence. Something we hear about, but doubt, seems proven when we’re shown a photograph of it.” Meaning it can be used to proof that something is going on within evidential reports; for example within military camps and to evidence terrorism and abuse towards detainees, people would make statements with no proof, once they have seen a photograph it made it become real and gave it some form of humanity and reality which made it stand out and made it believable.

August Sander also has the same approach with his social documentary, where not only was it to record and document but also to enlighten and creatively educate the viewers and people around him so the images would give them an insight to the subject and it would stick in their mind more than just stating it and making a point.

In today’s society editorial and advertising photography has become such a large part of the photographic industry and always raises a few hairs on whether it is believable or not. As editorial is the clash between seeing and wanting to see, this is done within post production changing the image from its original to make it appear better than it actually is, playing with the truth and its accuracy. Similarly advertising photography glamourizes products and bends reality testing our existing knowledge.

Overall I believe that the camera never lies, the truth of the photograph lies as much within the context of which it is being viewed as the image itself with camera manipulation or through post production.

  

Bibliography

Barthes, R. Camera Lucida

Sontag, S. On Photography

Daniel, M. MetMuseum. William Henry Fox Talbot (1800–1877) and the Invention of Photography [Online] Available from: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/tlbt/hd_tlbt.htm [Accessed: 11^th November 2014]

Sekula, A. CAA The Traffic in Photographs [Online] Available from: http://monoskop.org/images/d/d1/Allan-Sekula-traffic-in-Photographs.pdf [Accessed: 11^th November 2014]

Edwards, S. Socialism and the Sea [Online] Available from: http://www.radicalphilosophy.com/obituary/socialism-and-the-sea [Accessed: 11^th November 2014]

Nelson, K. A Thumbnail History of the Daguerreotype  [Online] Available from: http://daguerre.org/resource/history/history.html [Accessed: 11^th November 2014]

Daniel, M. Daguerre (1787–1851) and the Invention of Photography [Online] Available from: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/dagu/hd_dagu.htm [Accessed: 11^th November 2014]

Middleton, N. Photography & The Uncanny [Online] Available from: http://www.nicholasmiddleton.co.uk/thesis/thesis5.html [Accessed: 11^th November 2014]

Sontag, S. On Photography [Online] Available from: http://www.susansontag.com/SusanSontag/books/onPhotographyExerpt.shtml [Accessed: 11^th November 2014]