Ever since photography has been invented, photographers have been striving to give more impact to their photos. It might be as simple as using a dab of Vasoline on the front of a cheap, skylight filter to soften the look of the photo, to elaborate set-ups involving the use of multiple filters, to sophisticated dark room techniques. Ansel Adams, who is one the world's most recognized landscape photographers, took years to perfect his remarkable photograph, Moon Over Hernandez. All of these practices at first scoffed at, now constitute legitimate practices that are acceptable by the art community. Simply put, these methods are nothing more then tools that the photographer has at his or her disposal.
Digital photography is much the same. It is just another means to capture an image for display to the general public. Whether it is to be printed or sent electronically to a friend or relative, the end results have the same goal as film based prints. As the quality of digital gets better almost daily, so do the end results of these pictures. The art galleries are now showing exhibits of this new style of photography and it is being more and more accepted as time goes by. Digital photography, like it or not, is here to stay.
I like to compare this new technology to the time when we first went metric. Remember that? Today a lot of us older folks still weigh ourselves in pounds and do our woodworking projects in feet and inches. Yet, metric co-exists with the old standard and the younger generation only uses metric. I believe the same will happen with digital. The younger children are learning metric as well as digital and as time goes by, they will be doing almost all of their photography in the digital format. At some point in time, digital photography as well as the metric system will be all that is used.
Some will argue that there is way too much manipulation in the digital format. Yet, who is to say how much is too much. The photographer with a certain vision in his mind should use all the tools at his disposal to create his or her particular concept of the scene he or she is viewing through the viewfinder. Just keep in mind that I am referring to the photograph as a work of art. There are times, I believe, when manipulation is not ethical. What are these occasions? Any type of documentary photography should strive to remain as true to the original scene as possible. If I want my viewers to see what the truth is, then I must present the truth. There must not be any embellishments or added components to the picture. Not to say that I should not use the best light I can or use storm clouds for impact or any other natural means to create a punchier photograph. What I shouldn't do is to place objects that were not in the original scene or change in any way what is in front of my eyes. In this instance it is true what they say, the camera must not lie. It is all too easy to give photos extra impact with the technology that is available to us but I'm straying from my original subject.
I believe that as photographers, we need not shy away from any new technology, yet we don't need to embrace it wholeheartedly either. That digital photography is here to stay is certain, it's how we use it to create our art that is important. Think of it as just another tool in your camera bag. One that will help you realize the vision in your mind when you first had a glimmer of the photo that was there, waiting to be brought forth for others to see.
Next month, I'll attempt to write about filters and how they can improve your photography.
