The Ontology of Photography: From Analogue To Digital

[Philosophy Now]

Peter Benson on why digital photos aren’t reliable records of anything.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/95/The ... To_Digital

[marjoram_blues]

Peter Benson on why digital photos aren’t reliable records of anything.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/95/The ... To_Digital

What?
Why wouldn't digital photos not be a reliable record of anything?? And do they have to be 'reliable'? What about the art of taking a photograph - is it so very different from making a picture? Putting things into perspective...
from Henri Cartier-Bresson and Jonathan Jones, respectively.

He disliked developing or making his own prints[2] and showed a considerable lack of interest in the process of photography in general, likening photography with the small camera to an "instant drawing".[21] Technical aspects of photography were valid for him only where they allowed him to express what he saw:
Constant new discoveries in chemistry and optics are widening considerably our field of action. It is up to us to apply them to our technique, to improve ourselves, but there is a whole group of fetishes which have developed on the subject of technique. Technique is important only insofar as you must master it in order to communicate what you see... The camera for us is a tool, not a pretty mechanical toy. In the precise functioning of the mechanical object perhaps there is an unconscious compensation for the anxieties and uncertainties of daily endeavor. In any case, people think far too much about techniques and not enough about seeing.
— Henri Cartier-Bresson[13]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Cartier-Bresson

So - the important thing is to be able to express what you see. Even if it is only an 'instant drawing' with a small camera. 'People think far too much about techniques and not enough about seeing'. Perhaps the same could be applied to philosophy...getting tied up in knots with, and in the mind. Not enough capturing of the momentary flash...

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign ... e-painting
why are so many people comparing a photograph of New Year’s Eve in Manchester to the masterpieces of Renaissance art?
Forget its supposed compositional harmonies: comparing a photo of some drunk revellers to the masterpieces of the Renaissance is an insult to the deeply skilled and difficult enterprise of painting.
'Like a beautiful painting': image of New Year's mayhem in Manchester goes viral
It started when a BBC producer tweeted that a photograph of revellers by Joel Goodman in the Manchester Evening News was “like a beautiful painting”. Then people started turning it into a “painting”, or analysing its supposed mathematical harmonies, or comparing it with the Sistine chapel, the Last Supper and more recent Renaissance-influenced masterpieces such as Seurat’s Bathers at Asnières.
What a silly start to 2016 in art – for the differences between this photograph and a Renaissance painting are far larger than any similarities. Taking a picture is so very different to making one.
- Jonathan Jones

Why is it silly to compare a photo with a painting?
Joel Goodman's street scene was captured in the moment - right place, right time. Photography Now. Where can I buy the magazine...