The Camera Never Lies is a Lie because we can make the camera lie. Quality photography? or maybe its value as artistic photography?
When we see these side by side. Same negative used over and over but are exposed differently. Implie different types of light and different types of quality.
Major exhibiton of Adams work in London. Small photographs. Negative.
We might as is this groundbreaking?
Again here, Stalin with and without trotsky. He's removed from history through manipulation. The photograph renders the truth but with digital technology, it really doesn't.
This image on the left and right shows the manipulation and removal
In more recent years, this viral on the web was shortly after 9/11. A frivolous usaage of technology.
These 'Adbusters' style images
These two images have been merged together to manipulate a fake situation.
Equally as frivolous for GQ magazine. Kate Winslet on the front with legs that arn't really hers. They've been digitally enhanced to make them longer in order to sell. This was enhanced obvioulsy in the double page spread with a fake mirror shot.
You might question, is it fair game to do this to sell products?
People said that this image from the Spanish Civil War, was a bullet exiting the mans head but really its a skull cap that he's wearing. This man is falling down but we don't know if he's just been killed or not.
Things being fabricated doesn't just stay with the photograph but the name 'Robert Capa' is also fabricated.
Emotive, Poetic romanticised vision of this death. The history of it recently.
Mexican Suitcase - His negatives and contact sheers were found in mexico in a suitcase which later found out that he was killed but not here. We are persuaded to think a certain way of death.
Peter Turnley a photographer who photographed the first gulf war. This is his collection of photographs that depict the reality of war.
Baudrillard talks about representation of simulation...
Talking about how visual imagery.
He talks about
He wrote that the Gulf War didn't take place. Here is talking about the fact that in the Gulf War, it is more like simulated war or reproduction of a war.
It was geared up to start on a particular time, when news was going out on CNN. It was very sanitised, no news of people being killed.
A Notion of truth in the fact that there are burnt out bodies, shot in black white which might sanitise the idea.
This imae of the Iraq soldier became iconic. Appeared on the front of numerous British Newspapers. Starting to publish in colour as well as black and white. The Guardian in particular got there knuckles wrapped from forces above for being too gruesome.
Certain types of Newspaper, you read them to be informed. Who's to say what you should and shouldn't see in a newspaper. It's the news.
Equally An-My Le documented war in Afganistan. Small Wars is her work and documents a different experience of War. In a way is this more fine art photography? than document photography? is more the beautiful image that comes from devastation as a pose to demonstrating the truth.
Is this making art out of conflict or is it just as important as documenting photography this as well as the gruesome stuff.
Who's to say what is obscene and respectful?
We have principles of behaviour that are set within society.
This book, The Morality of advertising?
He used the question mark in the title which is already questioning. The notion of advertising is this thing that makes you better? Is is selling a lifestyle that is better than your bland existence.
Cadburys Flake. The image of the girl putting the phallic flake into her mouth.
The notion of does it say more about the mentatlity of the individual and how they percieve what is going on in the advert?
Angelic White baby and Demonic Black Baby. Are we pushed to believe this or are we wrong for thinking that?
The top right one of jesus dying in bed. Is this
This makes the point that theres no such thing as bad publicity so even if the adverts got banned, more attention is brought to them.
Opium advertisment. Why Should Childbirth be more offensive that a naked woman?
The idea with this one, came under much discussion at the time. Sophie Dahl, seen as a larger sized model who didn't conform. What was offensive about is the fact that she may have been in sexual ecstasy.
At the time it cause serious offense worldwide.
It became acceptable when turned the other way. Now shes on her kness which is somehow seen as more acceptable.
National Treasure - She makes the point in response to various things going on in the media and advertising at the time that we can't see nudity like that in advertising but you can go into the gallery in london to see this masterpiece, anytime you want.
Venus and Cupid. She snogs her son as he feels her breast. This incestuous scene is seen as okay because it's seen as a masterpiece but you wouldn't be able to see this is the media in a different way.
Elsewhere these paintings tread a fine line. Bono is a big fan of this artist. He's famous for showing these pre pubesenct teenage girls in a sexual manner.
Menat painting that was then reinacted by Bow Wow Wow for the cover of the record. The singer of the band was 15 when this was photographed. In 1980, it was acceptable that a teenage girl was naked on a cover which wouldn't be able to be done now.
Would you even question her age if you seen it in a gallery? no probably not.
Tasteful representations of sex for example se shown in a film as appose to explicit pornography.
The next few examples are taken from the last 10 years or so...
Is fine art or other disciplines, who is to decide what is serious art and what isn't.
Sally Mann, shows her own child with a candy cigarette. Shows a child in this situation which might be offensive to people.
Is there any form of erotic value to this? even thought there kids?
Most of our parents probably have photographs of us naked when your younger, but they probably don't get blown up for people to see in exhibitions.
Pedophilia isn't new but the term being so known is.
These where put into exhibition in Saatchi London. On her website you can see these works of her children. This might be an indication of the fact that she stills sees them for artistic value.
This is a key point in terms of the fact that these are being put on display for the public.
Is this an indecent image or is it kids in the bath having fun?
The Saatchi gallery was shut down for a few days but then put back on as art.
You might agree that she is naive.
This photograph demonstrates the image of a child actress Brooke Shields. At the time (1976) for a sugar and spice magazine which was highly sexualised.
they hung it up in the exhibition and invited the police to look at it who asked them to take it down.
They then printed 1000's of stickers to go through the catalogue and place over the image
This is Brooke Shields again later in 2005. The original image, her mother received a lot of money for the original photogaph which appeared in a semi-pornographic magazine.
She was later photographed as a woman in the same position for the pleasure of men. For a sterotypical point of view what has she learnt?
Leave your comment