Tuesday, 23 November 2010

The Document

Documentary photography.


The main idea behind documentary photography is to objectively record history as it happens.  But is what we are seeing actually what happened?
From this lecture I have found that unfortunately the majority of this type of photography can't really get away from some form of staging that affects the meaning people gain from it.  I think the quote below sums it up pretty well.
"Still there is something predatory in the act of taking a picture. To photograph people is to violate them, by seeing them as they see themselves, by having knowledge of them as they can never be; it turns people into objects that can be symbolically possessed. Just as the camera is a sublimation of the gun, to photograph someone is a subliminated murder- a soft murder, appropraite to a sad, frightened time."- Susan Sontag, 1979:15.
Something as simple as the camera angle can change the whole mood of a photograph and the way it is received by the viewer, and the photographer can either subconsciously or consciously decide this mood.  Either way, I think it is almost impossible to escape some form of bias when taking an image; and that is why in my opinion documentary photography is not wholly truthful and cannot by fully trusted. 


James Nachtwey is a current example of a documentary photographer.  Nachtwey records events, acting as a 'witness' to them, his idea is that by recording what is happening it highlights these terrible things, hopefully stopping them from happening again.  He states that they "should not be forgotten and must not be repeated", and taking images of these instances is a permanent way to record what has happened.  In his images he places himself right in the conflict, producing photographs that show the true animalistic nature of the subject matter.  By removing himself from the photographs it feels more to the viewer that they are right there, standing in front of this scene- hopefully forcing some form of emotion from them.  For example, the image below, 'Ground Zero', has a very dramatic feel, one that I think has been heightened through photographic techniques- rather than just a plain image of the subject matter.  The camera angle is slightly diagonal, adding to the already fractured landscape.  Also, there is focus on the broken, sharp metal in the foreground which means the viewer will see this first, thus they will have already been influenced on what tone they are going to receive the image in.  This is what Nachtwey wants- he wants viewers to take this is a negative way and force them to react. 
New York 2001, Ground Zero.


































William Edward Kilburn.  Another example of an image where the photographer excludes themselves from the image would be this:
'The Great Charitist meeting at The Common'































This image is less about creating an emotion like Nachtwey and more about a true neutral perspective coming from an image-  it is more about fact.  Nevertheless, visual narration in any form is essentially impossible to cut out of an image, however neutral the photographer thinks they are being.  Specifically in this image, the elevated camera positioning gives the image a feel of power through the immense crowds of people, creating a form of tone that has existing connotations for the reader to accept as historical fact.

"How much should documentary photography be concerned with aesthetic, does this focus make it unreal?"
I think that the fact this question comes up shows that it takes away from the authenticity of the nature of a photograph.  When something is emphasised to make a point it takes away from the original idea of revealing truth because it's made to look worse than it is, essentially creating a lie.
Jacob Riis (1888) 'Bandits Roost'

A good example of the above statement would be this image.  The environment is real, yet the scene is not, the people are staged, they have been told where to stand and how to look.  The staged element emphasises the intimidating feel within the image- which is not truthIn essence the image is more powerful because of this so the message is more obvious.  I think perhaps photographers underestimate the viewers' intelligence.


















This image is truth, capturing a real moment in time with real emotions.  This style of photography is all about the decisive moment- the most truthful and powerful form of photography.
Even though the image is so real and raw that no exaggeration has to be incorporated, it poses the question: 'should the photographer interviene at these moments when they could be stopping these things from happening?'.

No comments:

Post a Comment