Re: Is there in truth no beauty?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Well, BR is back and I expect the list exchanges to be spicier and more heated as a result. Now to the nitpicking.

Bob Rosen wrote:
I would argue that beauty is truth and truth is beauty.

John Keats would, and did, argue that artistic/philosophical simplification as well. It may be true but it is only a partial truth. The terms "truth" and "beauty" must be defined here for this to be arguable.

Does an artist change perceptions of reality as Darwin and Einstein did? I don't think so. Perhaps an artist provokes us to reconsider the meaning of freedom. Most artists defend freedom almost as a condition reflex. So there must be a connection.

Artists can and have changed the perceptions of reality. The way the world looks at war, for example, was probably altered somewhat by Picasso's Guernica and Goya's Horrors of War.

Leica perfected the lens alowing us to faithfully record the truth.

Absolute brand loyalty pap! And John Palcewski has already addressed the idea of a lens recording truth. It ain't true.


Steve Shapiro tells us that Digital lenses change the fundamental nature of lenses. Is this not the fundamental nature of truth?

I don't believe that is what Steve said. The fundamental nature of lenses is not altered but the information in the form of light may be manipulated for a purpose. That may also be a fundamental nature of truth.

Do we as artists invent reality? I dont think so? Am I a digital invention? I think not.

The art that is created is a reality all its own so the answer is yes, artists do invent reality. As for you being a digital invention, I have no way of proving otherwise in cyberspace.


Thanks for your time.

Don

Bob

John Palcewski wrote:

This thread is--pardon my saying so--utterly absurd. A wide angle lens--made for digital or otherwise--renders an image that is not exactly faithful to how the unaided eye sees, hence it is untruthful. But who cares? A lot of things happen after a photograph is taken. You select one image from many. Whether you intend to ultimately tell the truth or lie about a subject is up to you. "Facts of nature?" "Truth of the lens?" Ha! If you're really a photographer you're out there making images, not wasting time with this psuedo-philosophial BS.

John

Isola d' Ischia, Italia
http://www.livejouornal.com/users/forioscribe



> is not the cone of light from our lens also a fundamental fact of
> nature?



> Or have those we trust become so digitized that we lose the
> truth of the lens?



_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail








-- ====================================================================== Don Roberts * Bittersweet Productions * Iowa City, IA * * If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there. -- Lewis Carroll =======================================================================


[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux