Remediation: Understanding New Media

In the book, Remediation: Understanding New Media, authors Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin tackle the issue of mediation. At one point in this book, the authors discuss photographic truth as it relates to digital photography. The authors’ basic claim here is, again, similar to my own thesis, in that they believe that digital photography is challenging the traditionally and widely accepted belief in photographic truth. Essentially, digital photography threatens those who "believe that traditional photography has a special relationship to reality" (106). The authors also quote from William J. Mitchell’s book The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era, a resource that I also found helpful for my research. I am continually surprised by the fact that my own research follows the path of many others who have explored this topic.
I can see yet another parallel to my own work when the authors of Remediation claim, "photographic ‘truth’ was not unassailable even in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries." Again and again, we can see that the notion of photographic truth has always been on somewhat faulty ground. The authors mentioned that, "Impressionists claimed that their paintings captured the truth of light better than photographs could" (106). The authors also mention, like Mitchell, that combination printing had the ability to deceive viewers long before the advent of digital imaging. The authors present an example of combination printing that successfully deceived viewers, a photo of a young girl posing with cardboard cutout fairies. According to the authors, this photo "managed to convince much of the English public that fairies existed" (106).
In relation to photographic truth, the authors also discuss the CD-ROM work, Truths and Fictions by the photographer Pedro Meyer. (Again, I also found Meyer’s work to be helpful in my research.) The authors claim that because we know that most of Meyer’s photos are digitally altered, even the photos that haven’t been manipulated seem "artificial." Therefore, with this work, "Meyer is making Mitchell’s point that with the advent of digital technology the photograph has lost the simple relationship to the real that it previously enjoyed" (108). This relationship between truth and photography was essentially, an expression of what the authors call, our desire for transparent immediacy. In contrast, digitally altered images, because they make the viewer aware of the photograph as a medium, are considered to be a representation of that desire for immediacy. As the authors eloquently put it, "digital photography appears to complicate and even to mock the desire for immediacy that traditional photography promises to satisfy. On the other hand, because a digital photograph can sometimes be regarded as transparent, it too can express our desire for immediacy" (111). We can see then that both traditional photography and digital photography are dealing with opposing expressions of the logic of immediacy. The notion of photographic truth is no longer appropriate for examining photography; one must now examine a photograph according to its relationship to immediacy.

The Evolving Status of Photojournalism

In an article entitled, "The Evolving Status of Photojournalism Education," author Claude Cookman discusses the effects of photographic truth on the field of photojournalism. While the majority of the article discusses the changes that photojournalism has seen as a result of digital technology, we are more concerned with the section of this article focusing on the ethical issues of digital photography. Due to the fact that digital technologies allow photographers to manipulate images subtly and seamlessly, it is now virtually impossible for the untrained eye to spot alterations. According to the author, "leaders in photojournalism saw this new capability for seamless manipulation as a threat to the credibility of the photographic image and thus to the profession [of photojournalism]." In other words, the problem of photographic truth takes on ethical connotations when it enters the field of photojournalism. This is not to say that the ethics of photographic truth are not important to those in other fields, such as artistic photography. I am merely suggesting that because credibility is a major asset of photojournalism, it is important for this field to maintain a strict code of ethics relating to photographic truth. In reaction to this concern about photographic truth, the National Press Photographers Association added to its "code of ethics a strong prohibition against digital manipulation. [Stating that] in documentary photojournalism, it is wrong to alter the content of a photograph in any way that deceives the public." In addition, the NPPA considers it necessary to label any manipulated images as such. Taking the NPPA code of ethics into consideration, I find it interesting that TIME Magazine was able to publish an digitally altered mug-shot photo of O.J. Simpson on it's cover (seen above, left). When the TIME cover is compared to a Newsweek cover bearing the same original image (seen above, right), it is clear that the TIME photo was altered to make Simpson look darker and much more sinister. Now, the changes made here are not drastic, but it would be impossible for a reader to know that this image was altered if he or she had no reference to the original image. In addition, even though the alterations are not drastic, the message that the viewer gets from this altered image is drastically different from the message received from the original photo. Therefore, we can see that this TIME cover is a case of pure photographic lying, thus the image should be labeled as a manipulated photo. From this altered TIME cover, we can also see the extremely important role truth ethics play in maintaining photojournalistic credibility.

"Fine Adventures: A Look at Pedro Meyer"

As we have seen in my previous blog entries, such as the entry discussing the work of Galen Rowell, many artists are now "embracing digital technologies in an effort to further realize their artistic goals." Pedro Meyer is another such photographer who is taking advantage of these new opportunities in photography. According William R. Terrell in an article entitled, "Fine Adventures: A Look at Pedro Meyer," Pedro Meyer is "one of the foremost straight photographers the now works digitally." Since the early 1980s, Meyer has worked as a documentary photographer, however, when new digital technologies became available to him, he began completing works primarily through a digital darkroom. Thus, Meyer's more recent photographs combine "the best of both film and digital elements, [and] through this unison, [he] creates images of paradoxical beauty that examines the complicated cultures of America and Mexico." Meyer shares these digital photographs and his "journey from documentary to digital photography," in his book, Truths & Fictions, the cover of which appears above.
To create a context for his discussion on Meyer, author William Terrell first discusses the idea of photographic truth as it relates to digital imaging. Again, we see here an argument which is strikingly similar to my own thesis on photographic truth. Terrell states that the debate of photographic truth now revolves around the idea of "whether digitally manipulated imagery eliminates 'truth' within a photograph. This concern is understandable considering that photography has been most commonly used as a recording device since its inception." However, the author claims that the debate over whether or not digital images eliminate truth is essentially a futile argument due to the fact that "photography has been a manipulated medium since its inception, whether it through cropping, angle of approach, sandwiched negatives, retouching, chemical alterations, or any number of other secret photography techniques employed for more than 150 years." So, again and again we come across the idea that manipulation and subjectivity are an inherent part of photography itself. These elements of manipulation were not brought about by digital imaging, but were present in traditional photography all along. Therefore, the problem of photographic truth can be applied to all photographs, digital and traditional.
In a statement similar to that which Galen Rowell made in the article "World's Best Prints," Terrell claims that "the computer has allowed Meyer to construct realities that are more truthful to what he remembers than to what may or may not have been there." So, here again we can see the paradox of digital imagery, in that while digital technologies are giving the photographer more tools for manipulation, they are at the same time, allowing the photographer to more accurately capture what he or she saw in front of the camera.

On another note relating to Pedro Meyer's photography, I highly suggest checking out his digital works, a few of which can be seen at Zone Zero, from Analog to Digital. On this site, Meyer shares a collection of photos that he entitles "The Camera's Brushes." These are beautiful, thought-provoking photos that are altered or manipulated to create the effect of paint merging with photography. It is this connection or merging of photography and painting that is made possible by digital technologies that has caught my attention in several of my research articles. I have become fascinated with the way elements of painting have become such a huge part of the digital aesthetic. It is as if technological advancements are simultaneously allow us to move forward artistically, while at the same time allowing us to return to our traditional roots of painting. In other words, digital technologies are not only giving us opportunities for new growth, but they are also allowing us to remediate traditional forms of media in a way that we could never imagine.

An Essay on Digital Image Manipulation

Surfing through the internet, trying to find resources in support of my thesis, I came across an essay by Chuck Doswell entitled, "An Essay on Digital Image Manipulation." This essay is a relatively reader friendly account of the changes and repercussions associated with digital imagery, but it was Doswell's section discussing "Photography and Truth," which caught my attention first. Doswell seems to have come to a conclusion that is incredibly similar to my own thesis statement, in that he claims, " The whole notion of photographic truth has been on a slippery slope toward being discredited for some time, as the image manipulators have become more sophisticated, but in my opinion the concept of such truth has always been in dubious foundations." Doswell supports this opinion stating that the 'tricks of the photography trade" were developed and practiced long before the advent of digital imaging. To him, for a photo to be completely "pure" or truthful, "all photographic manipulations would have to be avoided: no filters, no flash, no push/pull processing, no choice of film emulsion, no spotting and retouching, no composition, no cropping, etc." Therefore, it is the subjectivity found in the photographic process that actually negates the undisrupted or absolute truth of the representation.
In this essay, Doswell claims that two things have occurred as a result of the advent of digital imaging, first, the tools for sophisticated image manipulation have now been made available to a wider amount of people, and second, the sophistication of these tools have increased the photographic realism of digital images, to the point where we can no longer tell what is real and what has been computer generated. According to Doswell, it is this second change that will eventually completely deny the notion of photographic truth. In his words, this change "will have the ultimate impact of making a digital 'photograph' as unreliable for evidence of 'truth' as an artist's painting." Essentially, Doswell is making a parallel between digital manipulation and painting. To me, this connection between digital manipulation and painting is especially interesting. It could be said that, we have created technologies that could increase or improve photographic truth, but at the same time, these technological advances have made it easier for us to photographically "lie." Thus, we can see the paradox within digital imaging, that it not only gives us the ability to recreate reality in absolute truthfulness, but it also allows us to more easily manipulate or lie about reality. In addition, digital imaging also allows us to create all new "virtual realities," something that previously could only be done in painting. So, with digital imaging, it as if we have explored technology to an extent in which we have made a complete revolution, and we find ourselves back where we started, painting our reality.

World's Best Prints

In an article entitled, World's Best Prints, photographer Galen Rowell writes about his experience in converting from traditional film to digital imaging. In this article, Rowell, an internationally know nature photographer, explains that his best photos "resulted from a passionate participatory involvement with the natural scene before [his] lens." Rowell states that his concern is not with fiddling with technical aspects of the camera to create a perfect shot, but instead, he is concerned with "spending as much time as possible in the wilds doing the things that gave my life meaning." Essentially, throughout this article Rowell is trying to express the advantages one can obtain by using digital imaging. Rowell explains those involved in fine-art photography are highly resistant to digital manipulation, frowning upon the changes that could be created through Adobe Photoshop. However, according to Rowell, digital imaging allows for "faster and more consistent photography." With his conversion from traditional film processing to digitizing images, Rowell found that he could increase the size of the print without compromising the tonality or the sharpness of the image. In other words, the image quality, in terms of tone and sharpness, of the large, 50-inch digital prints were the same as the image quality of the 35 mm originals. As Rowell states, with "traditional enlargements color and contrast do fall off as they are spread ever larger and thinner through a lens, but digital information being fed into a scanning laser will expose a 5-inch print or a 50-inch print with equal color and contrast." The picture above illustrate the idea that large prints can have the same image quality as their smaller, 35 mm counterparts.

Rowell completed 45 large photographs with the help of digital imaging tools, prints he refers to as Crystal Archive LightJet photographs. In his exhibition of these photographs, a show entitled Veridical Visions, Rowell was approached with viewers asking whether or not the images had been manipulated. Thus, with the involvement of digital processes, Rowell was immediately forced to prove or validate his photos for those concerned about the truth of what he represented. In response to these concerns, Rowell says that he made his belief that "nature photographers have a sacred trust to print no more or less than what was actually before their lens, unless the image is disclosed as digitally altered or presented as digital art." However, it is also Rowell's belief that photos need not show flaws that were not before the lens, such as those flaws introduced by scratches, emulsion flaws, enlarged grain or inaccurate color shifts. Therefore, Rowell is claiming that the uncontrollable flaws introduced by technical difficulties are actually qualities that get in the way of an accurate representation. In a sense, traditional photography cannot fully capture what is before the lens. For Rowell, digital image processes have allowed results that are "more accurate renditions of what [he has] witnessed and recorded." Thus, here we can see that digital manipulation has actually increased the truth and validity of the photograph by removing scratches and grain, as well as correcting color shifts. Using digital technology, staying away from embellishment or over manipulation, can actually allow the photographer to create prints that are closer to what he/she actually saw when they took the photo.

What about Digital Technology and Visual Truth?

Alright, alright... We know that traditional photography has been manipulated or prone to subjectivity since its inception, but what about truth in the digital age?

In an essay entitled, "Digital Technology and Visual Truth," which I believe is a term paper made available over the internet, author Miron Lulic attempts to discuss the myth of photographic truth as it exists in digital images. According to the author, the computers have now made it possible to alter any image in a digital medium, and as a result we are faced with "an over abundance of information in which authenticity is hard to verify." Thus, the already present myth of photographic truth persists and is amplified in the digital age. In fact, this is the thesis for Lulic's essay, "Although malleability of digital images is widely understood and accepted, the myth of photographic truth continues to shape ideologies in the post-photographic era."
Lulic begins the essay by making claims similar to Margot Lovejoy in her book, Digital Currents: Art in the Electronic Age, mainly that digital images are much easier to manipulate that traditional photographic images. Lulic quotes William Mitchell, which, again, sounds similar to Lovejoy's statements, "We are experiencing a paradigm shift in how we define the nature of a photograph. The photograph is no longer a fixed image; it has become a watery mix of moveable pixels and this is changing our perception of photography."

I am not sure of the credibility of this essay, due to the fact that it is a term paper written by a student, so I won't use it extensively here. However, the essay does allow us to understand that photographic truth is something hasn't faded with improved technology, we are dealing with it again, even more so, in the digital age. The fact that students (both Miron Lulic and myself), as well as art historians and writers, are interested in investigating the myth of photographic truth can show how prevalent it is within this new digital culture.

Images, Power, and Politics

In an article entitled "Images, Power and Politics In Practices of Looking: An Introduction to Visual Culture" authors Marita Sturken and Lisa Cartwright explore the notion of representation and perception in our visual culture. The authors discuss issues that are closely related to my thesis. First, the authors discuss the idea of representation throughout history, "debates about representation have considered whether these systems of representation reflect the world as it is, such that they mirror it back to us as a form of mimesis or imitation, or whether in fact we construct the world and its meaning through the systems of representation we deploy." Here, we can see the depth behind the debate over representation as the truth of reality. Subjectivity is always a factor when creating a representation of reality.

According to the authors, it was positivism that contributed to the acceptance of the notion of photographic truth.

Photography was developed in Europe in the early nineteenth century, when concepts of positivist science held sway. Positivism involves the belief that empirical truths can be established through visual evidence. An empirical truth is something that can be proven through experimentation, in particular through the reproduction of an experiment with identical outcomes under carefully controlled circumstances. In positivism, the individual actions of the scientist came to be viewed as a liability in the process of performing and reproducing experiments, since it was thought that the scientist's own subjectivity would influence or prejudice the objectivity of the experiment. Hence, machines were regarded as more reliable than humans. Similarly, photography is a method of producing images that involves a mechanical recording device (the camera) rather than hand recording (pencil on paper). In the context of positivism, the photographic camera was taken to be a scientific tool for registering reality and was regarded by its early advocates as a means of representing the world more accurately than
hand-rendered images.

I have quoted such a large section of this article because it effectively, and eloquently describes the origin of the myth of photographic truth. As early as the turn of the nineteenth century, technology has had an impact on public and human consciousness. In the context of photography, the idea of positivism suggests that visual representations are able to provide evidence of a true reality. However, in order for the visual representation to be evidence of truth, the process must be objective. Essentially, technological machines are a tool in which we can achieve objectivity, and thus, truth. However, this argument has holes. First, machines are fundamentally human-made objects. Second, these machines, especially the camera, are operated by humans. Therefore, technological machines are not objective tools, they are, in fact, steeped in human subjectivity from the time of their creation, to the time when they are put to use. However, I can understand how this positivist view on photography has gained so much momentum. There is a separation, or a distancing between the operator and the medium that is created by the machine. However, it is my belief that humans are so involved in the creation and manipulation of the camera, that subjectivity could never be completely removed from the photographic process.

"The Impossible Photograph: Hippolyte Bayard's Self-Portrait as a Drowned Man"

Throughout the research process, I have become fascinated with the early examples of manipulated photography. The fact that photos were being manipulated since the inception of the photographic process shows that digital manipulation is just another way of denying the myth of photographic truth. An image created by Hippolyte Bayard is yet another example of an early photography that renounces the myth of photographic truth. Although the image was not changed or manipulated in the darkroom, the subject matter of the image serves to deny the idea of photographic truth. Bayard is taking advantage of the viewers assumption that photographs are a truthful documentation of reality.

In an article entitled, "The Impossible Photograph: Hippolyte Bayard's Self-Portrait as a Drowned Man," author Michael Sapir discusses a photograph by Hippolyte Bayard that questions authenticity and the idea of photographic truth. Sapir writes about the prevalence of the notion of photographic truth at the time:

The public reception of photography following its official announcement on August 19, 1839 was guided by the prevailing nineteenth-century ideology of positivistic realism and its on-going quest for mimetic truth. Martin Jay, in Downcast Eyes, writes about this "commonplace . . . assumption of photography's fidelity to the truth of visual
experience."

Therefore, in Bayard's 1840 photograph entitled, Self-Portrait as a Drowned Man, the photographer depicts himself as the victim of a suicide, which according to Sapir was,
"provoked by the failure of the French authorities to recognize his own discovery of the photographic process as equal to Daguerre's pioneering work." Bayard even created a suicide not that was written on the back of the photograph. With this photograph, Bayard is not only expressing his metaphorical death, but he is also objecting to the idea of photographic truth. In a sense, by acting as both the artist/photographer as well as the subject, effectively validating his own death, Bayard is taking this denial of truth even further.

The Camera Never Lies? (First Entry For New Grading Period)

In an article on the website, "Culture Wars," author Nathalie Rothschild presents a summary of an Art Monthly panel discussion entitled, "The Camera Never Lies?" In November of last year, speakers Craig Burnett, Alison Green, Axel Lapp and Julian Stallabrass gathered at the Camden Arts Centre in London to discuss issues relating to photographic truth. The discussion topic is stated as the following:

The line between documentary and artistry is often fine, consider for instance the images in the annual worldwide photojournalism contest, World Press Photo. Yet the credibility of a photograph often seems to rely on the clarity of such a distinction. If a scene is constructed to appear real or spontaneous or to invoke a specific reaction from the viewer, the truth and honesty of the image will be disputed. And at the same time, capturing a scene, as it is, is impossible, as the photographer ultimately determines what the image will look like. When it comes to photography, agency, truth and representation are often discussed in moralistic terms, as dilemmas, and artistic freedom is not readily granted.

Essentially, this thesis statement is claiming that, although we may hold photography to be a medium of credibility, depicting reality truthfully, in reality the mere presence of the photographer denies this fact. Alison Green, a member of the panel, mentions the view of photographs as truth-telling mechanisms. For example, Roland Barthes, in 'Camera Lucida' took it as self-evident that photography is always analogical. Green also points out that photographs are often used as evidence in court cases.
Another member of the panel, Juilan Stallabrass, claims that "we are more inclined to think that a photograph is an accurate representation than a painting or a sculpture, the former of course having the advantage of immediacy and spontaneity so the 'artist's touch' can be more easily hidden." Here again, we see that the idea of photographic truth is an ingrained myth within our society. Although the camera gives the impression of objectivity, it is merely a tool that is better at hiding the touch of the artist.
Yet another member of the panel, Craig Burnett, brings up an interesting point, "urging the audience to remember that postmodernism taught us not to think in dichotomies and, hence the camera lies and tells the truth simultaneously." In a sense, Stallabrass also seems to bring a postmodernist perspective to the table, as he wonders, "why the art world insists on asking questions regarding the photographic lie when photographs have also been found to be ture and have been used to show truths, for instance to identify victims in the Vietnam war, to determine chronologies of events and in trials."

Truth Test

Fake or Foto is an interesting interactive site exploring photographic truth in the digital age. It asks the viewer to determine which of the displayed photos are real and which are digitally manipulated. Although most of them are easy, a couple photos actually fooled me.

Truth of the Moment & Truth of Reflection

In an informative article from Photovision Magazine entitled, “Truth of the Moment & Truth of Reflection,” authors Robert Hirsch and Greg Erf voice their opinion on the ideology of photographic truth. According to Hirsch and Erf, “the oxymoron known as photographic truth has never been a fixed entity; rather it results from an attitude of seeking and building reality from a particular viewpoint at a specific time.” The authors use a photograph by taken by Alexander Gardner in 1863, entitled, “Home of the Rebel Sharpshooter," to support thier opinion (photograph can be seen above). According to the authors, during the American Civil War technical limitations prevented photographic documentation of actual battles. Thus, "it was customary for photographers to create a representation, both in and outside of the studio, to produce a desired reality." Although with "Home of the Rebel Sharpshooter,"Gardner intended to portray the battle of Gettysberg, the photograph was actually taken two days after the battle. To "create his representation," Gardner moved the body of the soldier 40 yards from his final resting place, he added the gun (which in actuality is a musket not a sharpshooter), and also moved the face of the corpse to face the camera. The the photo is not a truthful documentation the battle, instead, "Gardner's war experiences guided his camera to bring forth an allegorical reference from a Norther perspective about the forlone loneliness of the Confederate cause, making such photographs not so much evidence of history as history themselves." Thus, the photographer's subjective perspective of the event takes presedence over truthful documentation. Gardner's experience is what is being documented, not the actual battle.
In the article, the authors even go so far as to claim that the discussion of photographic manipulation is a contradiction in terms. "Is not the act of photography a manipulation in space and time, a presentation of a particular point-of-view as opposed to an empirical fact." In essence, we can see that the very act of taking a photograph is an entirely subjective decision, with the photographer deciding what to shoot, what angle to shoot at, what to exclude from the frame and so on.

The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era

The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era by William J. Mitchell is an excellent resource for understanding photographic truth in the digital age. In this book, Mitchell presents a discussion on the idea that photographic reality, or authenticity, is being challenged by the emerging technology of digital image manipulation. In Chapter 1: "Beginnings," Mitchell discusses the ideas of photographer Edward Weston. According to Mitchell, Weston "valued the fragile integrity of a photograph's surface and argued that it inherently resists reworking or manipulation" (6). In other words, Weston valued the truth of the photograph. Another photographer, Paul Strand, took this idea even further, claiming that photographic manipulation was "unphotographic and fundamentally undesirable" (7). Here Strand is claiming that, by its very nature, photography should represent reality as it truly exists.

So, we can see that the combination print photography of Henry Peach Robinson, Oscar Reijlander and Jerry Uelsmann is in direct contrast to the accepted belief that photography is a medium of truth. In fact, despite the darkroom manipulation of combination printing, Mitchell claims that "when we look at photographs we presume, unless we have some clear indications to the contrary, that they have not been reworked. Here photography and digital imaging diverge strikingly, for the stored array of integers has none of the fragility and recalcitrance of the photograph's emulsion-coated surface...Digital images are, in fact, much more susceptible to alteration than photographs, drawings, paintings, or any other kinds of images. So the art of digital image cannot adequately be understood as primarily a matter of capture and printing..." (7). Here, Mitchell is clearly differentiating between darkroom manipulation and digital manipulation.

William Mitchell's book will continue to be a valuable resource in my exploration of photographic truth in the digtal age.

Modern Combination Printing

One of the most famous photographers using the combination print technique today is Jerry Uelsmann. For the past thirty years, Uelsmann has been making combination prints without the aid of any kind of digital processes. Uelsmann's website presents a beautiful portfolio of his work. In an interview with Uelsmann, conducted by Robert Hirsch of Photovision Magazine, the artist states, "Although photographers must contend with implied veracity they are always inventing other realities. A “straight" photograph does not literally replicate a scene. An Ansel Adams picture of Yosemite is not what you experience when you go there. There is always a transition that breaks from reality." In essence, Uelsmann is refuting the idea of photographic truth, saying that the subjectivity of the photographer and the distance of the viewer makes the representation of true reality impossible. In fact, early in the interview, Uelsmann makes an analogy connecting the photographer in the darkroom to the painter in the studio, a statement also refuting the idea of photographic truth. The photographs above are all done by Uelsmann using the a combination of prints. The top photograph is actually Uelsmann himself, sandwiched between two worlds, the earth and the sky.

Early Photographic Manipulation

Although the developments of digital imaging have brought our conception of photographic truth into question, it should be understood that even traditional photographers have been playing with the idea of photographic truth since the invention of photography in the early 1800s. In essence, digital manipulation is not really that different from darkroom manipulation. According to the website for the book, A History of Photography, by Robert Leggat, combination printing was developed as early as 1840 by the photographer Henry Peach Robinson. Combination printing refers to a technique in which a single cohesive photograph is made from combining more than one negative or print. According to Leggat, Robinson also introduced this combination printing technique to fellow photographers, including Oscar Rejlander, who enhanced the technique even further. One of Henry Peach Robinson's most famous photos, "Fading Away," from 1858, is a combination of five negatives. The photo (which can be seen above) depicts a young girl on her death bed, suffering from tuberculosis, surrounded by her grieving family members. Although not visible in this reproduction, the original photograph contains what Leggat refers to as "joins," subtle lines where the separate images meet. Even though these "joins" were evidence of manipulation, the viewing public was virtually oblivious to Robinson's modifications, believing the photograph to be a true representation. When in 1860 Robinson revealed his methods at a meeting of the Photographic Society of Scotland, he was met with protest, even anger from those who felt they had been deceived by his darkroom trickery. However, Robinson's intention was not to deceive his audience because he never claimed that "Fading Away," was a truthful representation of reality. Essentially, Robinson did not believe that photography was a medium of objective truth, in fact he saw photography as another means of altering reality to create a work of art. In his major literary work of 1867 entitled, "Pictorial Effect in Photography," Robinson wrote, "Any dodge, trick and conjuration of any kind is open to the photographer's use.... It is his imperative duty to avoid the mean, the base and the ugly, and to aim to elevate his subject.... and to correct the unpicturesque....A great deal can be done and very beautiful pictures made, by a mixture of the real and the artificial in a picture." Here we can see that, in a sense, Robinson saw himself as a photographic painter. Thus, through the work of Henry Peach Robinson and his development of combination printing, we can see that over a hundred years before before digital images were manipulated, photographs were not always telling the truth.

Thesis Statement

Traditional photography has long been considered a neutral or objective medium, in which one can truthfully capture reality. However, developments in digital imaging and photography have served to undermine this idea of photographic truth. In the book Digital Currents: Art in the Electronic Age, Margot Lovejoy points out that, "now a photograph's information can be processed or changed by manipulating or warping its structural light components in the computer to create images which are complete simulations" (154). The ability to alter and manipulate images to create these "artificial simulations of reality" directly contradicts the accepted belief that photographs are truthful representations of reality. The aim of this research blog is to explore the concept of the photographic truth in traditional photography and into the digital era, and to prove that that, in reality, the concept of the photographic truth is a myth.