Features

Photography and the Illusion of Reality

by

Photography is both a tool and a process of communication — between a person and reality, and between people within society. The more skillful this communication is, the more effective photography becomes. An image can foster understanding, or it can mislead; but only very rarely is a photograph a direct reflection of reality. For this reason, the only reliable criteria of a photograph’s documentary value remain the honesty of the visual narrative and the photographer’s conscience.

Photography has repeatedly been pushed toward the status of art, yet it was never fully accepted into the realm of “high art.” It has been called a “journalistic document,” but its evidentiary power has often been undermined by misleading captions, editing, and Photoshop. Eventually, photojournalism began to resemble a selfie — a story about oneself, told from the scene of events.

Certain religious dogmas prohibit the creation of images “in the likeness and image” of the Creator. Twenty years ago, such taboos seemed like obscurantism. Today, however, they acquire a different meaning in a world saturated with multiple virtual realities. This raises an inevitable question: which world is more real — the one created by God, or the one constructed by the photographer-manipulator?

The world I see beyond the porch of my house may differ significantly from the world I create as a photographer and present to the public through photography, 3D, or various forms of video. I may present what is desired as real, or the real as desirable. By translating the world onto a flat surface, I do not change it; I do not make it better or worse — I make it the way I see it. This is subjective, but it is not a moral transgression. Within such manipulations of reality, it is still possible to remain within the rules and principles of photojournalism.

First, composition, color, light, and the choice of the decisive moment are sufficient for me at the moment of shooting. Second, when selecting from many photographs, I search for the one that fundamentally distinguishes my own perception of reality.

In this way, a photographer can depict a person as “bad” or “good,” “kind” or “evil.” Often, however, the subject in the photograph is not individualized at all — they embody an abstract image of good or evil, serve as a background figure, or function merely as an element of the overall composition. A photographer can present different spaces and different narratives of the same event.

Unlike reality, photography is discrete. By presenting a large number of images, we can create the illusion of real life. Yet today, we no longer truly create photographs (a photograph is something that hangs on a wall). We create illusions, sell them, or simply show them to one another on screens — most often sharing them on social media.

Naturally, our illusions and photographs made in the same place may look completely different, depending on who created them: an ordinary observer or an experienced photographer familiar with the methods of visual manipulation.

It is naive either to believe or not believe in photography as a reflection of objective reality. The objective world does not become better or worse because of how we photograph it, but because of how we live within it.

Oleg Klimov, Photographer’s Diar

 

Share information — help keep the world free: