It’s All About The Camera

My English photo magazine colleagues in TIPA tell me that letters from readers – or, these days, emails – are a very regular occurrence after the publication of a new issue. Everybody has an opinion. One of my favourite UK classic car magazines has a ‘Pedant Of The Month’ column in which readers helpfully point out errors, however minor, in articles… it must be something to do with those long, cold winter nights.

However, this isn’t the Australian way. Of course we make mistakes (on rare occasions), but our readers tend to spot them, note them and leave it at that. So, when we suddenly get a deluge – well, a heavy shower at least – of emails about a particular issue, then we know it has to be something pretty important. And that’s what happened after my editorial in the last issue when I wrote about the manipulation of images (primarily in Photoshop) getting out of hand. My piece was prompted by renowned landscape photographer Ken Duncan’s decision to instigate a competition for what he terms “photo realism”, which means images primarily created in-camera with minimal postproduction in the computer. Ken’s particular concern is that overly manipulated images (he calls it “photo illustration”) are winning major awards and, in the process, are being passed off as records of reality. I’m with him on this and so, it seems, are many of you.

One reader, Al Green, observed that if we think things are bad in landscape photography, it’s nothing to what’s happening in portraiture where heavy retouching in now the norm.

“I’ve started to embrace imperfection,” he told me in an email. “Model’s skin remains un-retouched and the use of available lighting has brought surprises that add magic and enhance. No more perfectly lit mannequins for me.”

You can see some of Al’s explorations of this fresh approach at http://www.xperiencemedia.com/html/exhibit.html

As I’ve noted on a few occasions here, the pursuit of perfection in landscape photography is totally baffling. A landscape is what it is… with either nature’s many imperfections or the influences and interventions of man. The challenge for the photographer is to work with what’s in front of the camera, using all the tools that are available in-camera along with the skills of framing, composition and the like. If you want to change stuff, go right ahead, but don’t call the end result a photograph, because it isn’t.

So let’s define what we’re on about here. As in the past with a darkroom, Photoshop is fine for dealing with the technical deficiencies of the recording medium… so tools like Levels, Curves, Brightness/Contrast, Colour Balance, etc., are perfectly legitimate. It’s when elements are subtracted or added that a line is crossed. So-called ‘problem skies’ are often cited as an issue, but frankly, if you’re a competent photographer you should know how to deal with that in the field… with, for example, an ND filter or a polariser. As a photographer – and the word photography is derived from the Greek photos, meaning ‘light’, and graphos meaning ‘drawing’ – your principle tool is the camera. The ability to use a camera skilfully and creatively is what separates the photographer from any other sort of visual artist… including somebody who is a whizz on the computer with image editing software. The camera is what makes photography unique. And it’s all those important decisions that go into the taking of a photograph – such as the choice of lens focal length, the filter (on lens, of course), the exposure settings and even the viewpoint – that constitute the fundamental art of photography. The ‘fix it in Photoshop’ mentality has not only served to diminish the real value of these creative thought processes and how they’re subsequently realised in technical terms, but has diminished the perceptions of their importance, so there’s a carelessness and casualness at the capture stage which, frankly, nothing can remedy later on.

But what you’re also missing out on is the sheer enjoyment of camera work… the exquisite challenge of making a time and a place work in photographic terms, and which is even more rewarding if you’ve made a considerable effort to be there (like getting up at 4.00 am when it’s minus five degrees Celsius outside). And, besides, surely being on location with a camera beats sitting in front of a computer at home every time, doesn’t it?

And, by the way, I’m not advocating a return to film or even a ‘sackcloth and ashes’ depravation of automatic camera controls, because there are lots of digital-era functions that are truly useful… not the least being the immediate feedback on the monitor screen. However, the key is still understanding what these functions can and cannot do, so you can use them the most effectively.

Photography is ultimately all about the picture. But before this it has to be all about the camera. Amen.