On Thu, September 1, 2011 13:41, Herschel Mair wrote: > There you have it David: >> I don't know what "purely true image" means. To a first approximation, >> ALL camera-original images are "true". (What they're not, IMHO, is >> "complete".) > They are never COMPLETE truths and an incomplete truth, a selected > truth, a consciously manipulated truth - /IMHO/ is a lie. A man who > shows only the part of the scene that suits his own convictions is, by > virtue of exclusion, creating a lie, even without touching a single > pixel. That photograph is a lie. You can't leave it up to the viewer to > ask the right questions in order to get the whole truth. Of course, and that's true when you present the photograph in a context implying it's more than it is. That's why "complete" is the key in my reading of the situation. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
