Truth is indeed elusive. But what about the various "psychological needs" that Eisler says drove Stieglitz? Doesn't this suggest that creativity is a form of madness? And what is behind a creative person's "expressive impulse?" On 8/31/11, Herschel Mair <herschel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Facts are only facts from a given perspective. Only the very simplest > facts stand up to inspection.. > "The sky is blue"... well actually not... more correctly put "The sky > appears blue" > > And truth must be defined: Biblical truth? physical truth? Political > truth? what properties must a fact have to be "TRUE"? > > Simply to have been observed is hardly enough. How many optical > illusions are absolutely convincing? How fickle is the mind? Surely > observation involves the observer's life, experience, emotions? > > So what properties constitute "Truth"? and can a camera reproduce these > faithfully? Is there any integrity to truth? Must it be "The whole > truth" or can it be partially true? Must it contain all the facts or can > it relate only some selected facts? Surely if you can pick and choose > only the facts which suit you, then you have a manipulation. Perhaps > even a lie? > > Isn't it true that any photograph leaves out far more than it includes? > The frame line, by virtue of its selectivity and exclusion makes any > photograph a lie or at least a manipulation of the facts. And what about > time? Obviously the truth at Gettysburg this morning is not as it was > 1863. We select the time at which we shoot. > > And what about viewpoint? what might seem true from one viewpoint may be > totally different by moving a few inches. Escher showed that. > > We are like the inhabitants of Plato's cave. Looking at shadows and > making our truths out of them > > We all believed in Newtonian gravity. Quite observable and quite > "provable"... "What goes up must come down" A "Self-evident truth" > but not really... even the idea of "Up" isn't true. > Einstein radically changed the way we think about gravity and made > Newton all but obsolete. And as we speak Einstein's theories are being > challenged. > > I could aske you: "Is there a hippopotamus in your bedroom?" and you > might reply "NO" but how do you know?... Because you can't see one? > There is probably oxygen in your bedroom? But can you see it either. > > The famous mathematician, Bertrand Russell said that you'd have a > terrible time writing a proof for "There is no hippo in this room" > > Truth is a comfortable concept. It's comforting to think we have a firm > handle on life and the universe... but alas it's all too flimsy. > > > > On 8/31/11 8:54 AM, mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> I totally disagree. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not >> your facts. Truth is fact. Truth is absolute. There is no gray in >> truth. You may not like it, and you may wish it were different, but >> its there none the less. >> >> Now if you are creating art and the composition is perfect except for >> a tree you do not like in the frame, if you change the composition to >> leave it out is that the truth? Yes for that spot on the earth exists >> at that moment in time. If you take the image from the original point >> and clone it out is that the truth? No but for a print I am >> representing as art and not documentary, I would have no problem doing >> that at all. A model shows up with a big tattoo on her shoulder that >> disrupts the lines of her dress flowing. There is a big difference in >> cloning out the tat from a gallery print and cloning out the tat for >> an ID photo. >> >> I don't believe it is that hard to show truth, but showing emotions is >> a really tough assignment. Creating an emotional response to your >> work in the viewer that is the response you intended is the ultimate >> measure of success of an image. >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Re: Psychological Motives for Pursuing Photography >> From: Herschel Mair <herschel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:herschel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Date: Tue, August 30, 2011 11:33 pm >> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students >> <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> >> I wanted to study music and my family wanted me to be an >> architect... I >> studied photography. The faculty was in the printing and lithography >> department. It was "The British way" - Professionalism and know-how >> above all else. The old debate about "Art" hardly entered the >> equation. >> >> I'm not dealing with truth at all. It's such a vague abstract.... >> your >> truth my truth our truth... and changeable. I don't believe >> photographs >> are capable of translating what we feel or what we see truthfully. >> They >> will almost always trigger a different and personal experience for >> every >> viewer. The viewer feels and sees from his own life and experience. >> >> "We see things not as they are but as we are." Einstein >> >> I am motivated by two dynamics. I take pictures to sell stuff and I >> take pictures to please myself. >> >> The former is done to other people's specifications mostly. I >> shoot to >> please an art director or a client etc... >> >> The latter is done to satisfy an urge to play with light and >> perhaps to >> collect... To find images that fit into my projects so that they >> tell a >> better story and are visually more pleasing. >> >> I almost never shoot stuff that I don't "Need" for a project. What >> would >> I do with a pretty sunset? I love them as much as the next man and >> sometimes the light is so beautiful it turns me inside out. But I >> am not >> tempted to reach for a camera. I don't take gear with me when I go on >> vacation. >> For over 25 years now, photography has been work. Work that I love to >> do, but work nevertheless. >> >> Herschel >> >> On 8/30/11 9:58 PM, Trevor Cunningham wrote: >> > Amen. >> > >> > On 8/31/11 12:18 AM, Lea Murphy wrote: >> >> I'm not trying to reveal Truth, I'm trying to show what I saw, >> what I >> >> felt, what I felt about what I saw. >> > >> > >> > >
