Author Topic: What makes a photo a photo? (Read 2055 times)

voyager · « **on:** July 10, 2010, 01:12:05 PM »

Time for some philosophical discussion!

So what is it about a photo that really makes it a photo? Is it the fact that it's a collection of pixels captured and processed into a data file? Or is it something else, perhaps the personification given to it by the photographer when they consider how to shoot it, and how they title it, or how they show it to everyone else if they don't. What makes a photo...a photo?

Finder · « **Reply #1 on:** July 10, 2010, 01:33:32 PM »

The use of light to capture spacial/temporal information. The use of pixels is neither here nor there.

alxcoghe · « **Reply #2 on:** July 10, 2010, 02:22:15 PM »

Concept. Composition. Technique. Not in rigorous order.

Paul19 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 11, 2010, 02:01:41 AM »

An image that you want to look at, and come back to look at again....often.

Tercha · « **Reply #4 on:** July 11, 2010, 02:21:15 AM »

Pressing the shutter button.
Now a GOOD Photo....thats a different matter!

voyager · « **Reply #5 on:** July 11, 2010, 03:15:01 AM »

So you all think it's a collection of pixels? Very interesting. I feel like a photo needs to have some kind of human feel to be a photo.

adash · « **Reply #6 on:** July 11, 2010, 03:28:59 AM »

It's quite unexplainable. I can't say I make these yet, but there are ones that you can keep watching for quite some time. I guess that these are the true photographs.

Finder · « **Reply #7 on:** July 11, 2010, 06:53:31 AM »

Quote from: voyager on July 11, 2010, 03:15:01 AM

I feel like a photo needs to have some kind of human feel to be a photo.

Exactly how am I to achieve that when I taking a photo of a bug under a microscope?

voyager · « **Reply #8 on:** July 11, 2010, 10:14:21 PM »

Indeed.

I suppose it's relative to certain situations as well. A photo of a wall wouldn't exactly have a human feel to it.

adash · « **Reply #9 on:** July 11, 2010, 10:42:13 PM »

Quote

A photo of a wall wouldn't exactly have a human feel to it.

It could have one. The feeling of a man who is looking at it, for example.

cosinaphile · « **Reply #10 on:** July 12, 2010, 09:43:01 AM »

in a technical sense a photo uses light to record an image, its connection to humanity or its aesthetic merit does not matter here ...

, but on other levels a photo isnt a photo until it achieves a certain quality or quantity establishing its merit to its intended purpose......
...i could go on ......

m4bernard · « **Reply #11 on:** July 13, 2010, 08:34:12 AM »

photo is message
from a bunch of photos you wil see a photo with strong message
strong message makes a story, a poem ...
photo is poem

cosinaphile · « **Reply #12 on:** July 13, 2010, 08:46:22 AM »

all art and science as exploration is essentially the same..... so yes a photo is a poem , ill second that

Centauri27 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 14, 2010, 10:10:04 AM »

I was going to say that a photo needs some human personification, but then I recall the gizmo put out by Sony--it's a docking base where you mount your camera and you simply leave it on a table at a party and let the device whiz about snapping pictures on its own. No human intervention there, though it might capture some interesting photos.

mikmas101 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 14, 2010, 04:20:09 PM »

Your question has a straightforward answer in Physics (as has been pointed out already)

From a philosophical POV I think the question should be 'what makes a photo meaningful?'

.....or even 'how do photos make meaning?'

I have no definitive answers for either but would hazard that the first relies on the perception and response of the observer (what memories, associations or emotions are invoked by the viewing) while the second is the stuff of several library shelves and a fair number of University research projects across the globe.

One of my most treasured images is a qualitatively rubbish picture of my dad sat on the wall of Brighton Pavilion when he was a young man - one of the most inspirational, the picture of a pepper by Edward Weston. There is no rhyme or reason linking them at all.

Finder · « **Reply #15 on:** July 14, 2010, 04:42:08 PM »

Artistic intention is not required and even a red herring--as pointed out, the viewer response would trump any "intention" the photographer may have had (or made up later). Art is a superstimuli. Art has no "meaning" beyond viewer interpretation or use of culturally determined symbols.

Photography is NOT a language and therefore not a poem which is a linguistic construction--the "language of photography" is a writer's metaphor.

I would agree that there are great similarities between art and science. "Creativity" being one of the more important ones. However, science is outward looking trying to define an objective "truth," whereas art is an inward journey trying to find personal "meaning." Commercial art is just trying to sell you something.

tadeobiologo · « **Reply #16 on:** April 30, 2013, 02:14:26 PM »

neverminding the warning of 120+ days without reply on this post:

a photograph is an image generated by any light-sensitive media, be it photosensitive emulsion or digital image sensor.

A photograph gets a meaning if it can trigger the symbols present in your brain, previous photostimulation of your light-sensitive cells inside the eye (bottom of the retina). since symbols are generated and related one to another by personal experience, the sensations (and emotions) evoked by a picture are totally personal and subjective. one picture can be beautiful to me but crap to you depending on "what" moved on your brain.

i totally recommend Douglas R. Hofstadter´s book: I´m a Strange Loop
it´s wonderfully written and really makes you think

lisandra · « **Reply #17 on:** April 30, 2013, 11:39:30 PM »

Its funny... many, and i mean a lot, of the psychological tests I covered in my masters are image based, either a reaction to an image or a user created one. In the ones where the image is supplied the reaction is very different depending on the personality and overall life experience of that person. A photo of a bird inspires freedom, beauty and flight to a small town girl. She sees in that creature the ability to escape and be his own and to her, it evokes a reaction of delight. A new yorker might have the opposite reaction on the same image. Years of dealing with birds on windows, in the street, pooping in every monument and park they cant find; showing them a picture of a bird is repulsive.
A conservative might be bothered by saturation and HDR, its to bright and bubbly, and life isnt like that. Overly positive, perfectionist and religious people tend to love slightly over the top HDRs, theres light everywhere, there are no dark places. Private people enjoy a good shadow photo, the sense that there could be something there, but you cant see it.

So what makes a photo a photo? we all go through the same human experience, but at the same time we dont, so a photo is that: a part of our human experience. If its "human" enough itll be sure to click.

panzerfaustnl · « **Reply #18 on:** May 02, 2013, 02:18:05 AM »

You don't need a camera to create a photo, because before you create a photo with your camera, you already have done so in your mind, the only reason that you need a camera, is to show that picture to others and/or to use it to create something that lays beyond the original image..

We photographers, and many others, are creating images in their minds and try to catch that image in a digital and analog printing process on paper or other materials.

But the photo will never be made, because the photo is always your next photo.

nianys · « **Reply #19 on:** May 02, 2013, 12:54:21 PM »

The intent to "capture" an image, is, IMO what makes a photo. The appreciation for a given moment or sight that makes one want to freeze it and be able to own and recall it.

Pete · « **Reply #20 on:** May 02, 2013, 03:19:03 PM »

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on May 02, 2013, 02:18:05 AM

You don't need a camera to create a photo, because before you create a photo with your camera, you already have done so in your mind, the only reason that you need a camera, is to show that picture to others and/or to use it to create something that lays beyond the original image..

We photographers, and many others, are creating images in their minds and try to catch that image in a digital and analog printing process on paper or other materials.

But the photo will never be made, because the photo is always your next photo.

reminds me of the artist who entered his art, while at the show he was asked where his art was, and he said it was pictured in his mind I can describe it to you if you would like. then he said I have all kinds of finished art in my mind if you like I can describe those too. of course he was disqualified for having no physical artwork.

sent from my samsung Galaxy S3

Author Topic: What makes a photo a photo? (Read 2055 times)

Finder

Tercha

adash

Finder

adash

m4bernard

Finder

Related Topics

Find Something?

Recent Topics

Recent Gallery