Author: Jasmine Stephanie Storey

Post Photography or Past Photography is a fragment of text written by Andreia Alives De Oliveria analysing the digitalisation and use of technological equipment within the Photography medium. The text opens with the screen being the current norm for displaying photographs with digitalisation being the instant transmission and distribution of Photography thus being a highly acceptable concept whether that would be instantly sending your peers, family or colleagues images through social media or other messaging apps, waking up to view the “Breaking News alert on your smartphone or another technological device, advertisements through social media or fellow internet-based platforms, even the images you capture on your smartphone or tablet is required by lightly tapping onto a touchscreen.  When you are living in a contemporary society addicted to the latest Apple devices it seems compatible to cooperate with high – tech consumer culture as almost every individual carries the light, compact smartphone.

The text delves more into the novelty of digital photography and the quirky enhancements/features digital manipulation can offer taking advantage of these characteristics for external agents and money making agents contributing to consumer culture within a marketing standpoint it seems logical to take advantage of the high – tech audience. The wording of this perspective seems highly shallow to an extreme standpoint that using digital advantages for marketing purposes is the equivalent of selling your artistic integrity in order to survive we must make ourselves somewhat flexible this doesn’t necessarily mean destroying any creative beliefs of passion but displaying that you can compromise.

However, the perspective that was very prominent was by Martha Roller who claimed that manipulation was a fundamental element of Photography including lighting, framing, printing and presentation whether this is a conscious decision or not as Photography experience increases it becomes a force of habit to experiment and change these factors. Nevertheless, these aspects are used more for visual and artistic purposes than ethical. Another prominent perspective was Geoffrey Batchen stating that the absence of truth is inescapable whether this is conscious or not in wishing to be reliable we might take away elements of truth through digital manipulation in order to make the photograph believable or deceiving by creating a narrative or convince viewers that something is real. We may not think with this intensity as we clone stamp one segment of our image even without realisation of doing so.

“Photography as Activism” attempts to define documentary as a Photographic form due to constant transitioning describing this concept as multi-layered, complicated, and varied. A methodology of aesthetic that is applied to a broad range of imagery from traditional, straight reported imagery to inaccurate digitally manipulated imagery making appearances upon gallery walls. Bogre goes on to quote Walker Evans explaining that all Photography is somewhat documentary as this documents something that appeared upon camera whether we document this for sentimental value or to show others who did not witness this moment whether we keep this image for eternity or as long as desired.

Edward Steichen reviews photographs from the Farm Security Administration Photography unit referring to images that held power to draw an emotional response from viewers leading to the popularity of emotionally charged images. Thus, resulting in Photojournalism becoming increasingly popular as this offers viewers an emotional response regardless of being true or accurate to the scene being represented. I personally agree that the success of Photojournalism is due to emotionally charged responses as controversy and morbidity sells sparking discussion and memorable information whether this will be slightly or heavily manipulated. Bogre claims that Documentary Photography is about the means, approach, subject and then context the image does not need to be exotic or dramatic if it is relevant, accurate and displayed within the right context the image itself almost becomes irrelevant.  Commonly I would disagree with images not being exotic as exotic and sexually charged images always carrier higher success rates alongside becoming memorable due to visual pleasure or controversy.

Bogre recognises the many valid critics of the documentary genre with so many characteristics of bias being applied to reading and creating images resulting in a photograph that cannot be true. Bias will always remain even is this out of sight of the viewers or possibly subconscious to the photographer/reader. Bogre summarises Rosler critical essays assuming that photographs capture disadvantaged people in order to boost their profiles she does make valid points that the photographers do not care about these individuals thus only caring about capturing the moment in order to gain profit. Photographers are not fighting for a greater social change however this is an unfair generalisation.

In a later chapter titled “Modern History” Bogre discusses the history of Photojournalism and documentary work within modern times as war is a great source of drama therefore media outlets can consume this. Possibly a reason that Rosler becomes critical due to being surrounded by who desire to find conflict as this situation appears photographers desperately flood this area coming home to find respect and admiration. The function of documentary and journalism is significant as this is more immersive as  photography holds the power to dramatize the most bland of scenes elevating one to much drama when taken at the right, decisive moment immersing viewers into a fictional visual scenario.

When living in the golden age of technology and social media the concept of “selfies” grows ever more popular some may consider this a normal task of life much like brushing your teeth or locking your front door. However, when high-status figures such as Barack Obama and David Cameron take a “selfie” together I can understand the criticism of this incident due to the circumstance of attending the memorial of Nelson Mandela it’s a matter of respect. But, why is it always assumed that “selfies” are taken for narcissism or low self – esteem? Psychologist Jill Weber states that in her own experience young females have posted “selfies” due to low self – esteem searching for validation and comfort through digital likes and comments from online users. Photography carries the use of visual documentation and the selfie is no exception but this is only considered self – absorbed due to the subject taking the photograph themselves. Alongside Kate Losse in her 2013 New Yorker piece claiming that selfies were for people without friends an unfair generalisation. Murray, defends the selfie through post – feminism with social media allowing individuals to reblog images of iconic woman a legacy that continues to spread throughout the digital age with the simple click of a button! Murray states that the bombardment of objectifying within popular media as young women produce the image of themselves as sexual fantasy thus celebrating the history of women, rejecting unhealthy expectations encouraged by the media and promoting body positive. I simply love and agree with this concept a digital photo album of rebellion and expression with easy accessibility for the whole world to view thus providing a careless free attitude. Although some could argue that individuals post selfies using the excuse of rebellion and to allow provocative imagery with no backlash.

I was heavily intrigued by this article as it made me question the authenticity of celebrity intentions whilst introducing the concept of “Girl Gaze” it is easy to see the moral purpose allowing women from all backgrounds and ethnicity to have a voice through the aid of social media which is the advantage of living in a tech savvy society reaching a mass audience but it always important to not be distracted by the surface. Our contemporary society is filled with internet addicted obsessed teens and social media crazed young adults it is easy to see why as we all carry a smartphone allowing us to access this from almost anywhere keeping up with the non stop movement of the world but this is not mandatory as the article suggests not everyone will have access to these resources or choose not to. ‘Girl Gaze’ lives by offering all women a voice but if your campaign is online based not every woman has this opportunity as the article stated with a celebrity status to push this project into recognition branching out to women in third world countries or elderly women boosting moral recognition rather than shallowly relying on social status. When you’re living in a world that is infatuated with applying a filter on everything it is difficult to tell what is real without confronting the superficial aspect of aesthetic. Looft questions whether ‘Girl Gaze’ is specifically displaying images for aesthetic with a campaign that holds such passion and meaning it is challenging to take the concept serious if we are distracted by “pretty” and isn’t that just defeating the whole purpose of the campaign? As women we are much more than our appearance we desire to be known by intellect and skill I completely understand the intent to make images visual pleasing but your voice is what you say not how pleasing it sounds.

“The Mystery of The Missing Nipple” is a very engaging piece towards modernized humanity specifically to those who prefer to work digitally including me. Although Photoshop has become an aid for many photographers it may challenge the work ethic of these individuals Fontcuberta discusses public figure Kiera Knightly’s role in the blockbuster “King Arthur” she is pictured as bustier than perceived in real life. Photoshop can offer the opportunity to enhance features or possibly even add features could this lead to Photographers becoming sloppy within their visual casting choices because these features can be included with the touch of a button. Alongside using Photoshop for own personal sexual gain visually constructing sexual fantasies with their favourite celebrities adding to the ever so increasing pornification but is it moral? Is this just simply an enhancement of already lewd posing and provocative photographs? Is Photoshop making individuals power mad and power hungry?