Set Reading Week 7

Questions to consider about ‘Truth and Lies; On Digital Visions’ by Mariëtte Haveman


Why did Mariette Haveman write this article? (Not ‘What is is about?’ but what is the point of it? What does it do? You may need to read the whole thing before you answer this question).
She wrote this article to counter the arguments of many theorists who were concerned at how digitalisation was going to change photography and make it less truthful. She believes that photography has never been a media that cannot be manipulated, whether through actually manipulating the material photograph, or through staging the scene or choosing what to photograph. The article aims to show that photography will always continue to evolve (but also remain the same in some aspects), and that this has little to do with 'digitisation' but rather with consumer wants/needs, new practices etc.

What are some of the common concerns of theorists writing about the digitization of photographs in the 1990’s (pp.46-50).
Will we not be able to place even a small amount of trust in photographs anymore, even photographs that have already been taken, as any photograph could be doctored, 'Cultural history, political events, personal memories - all will be newly suspect while the photograph's long reign as society's high-tech but humble scribe becomes increasingly vulnerable', '[Abusive governments] will be able to manufacture their own suitably manipulated photographic versions of events' - Ritchin, 1990, 'This digitisation process redoubled the problem by further destabilising the bond the image had with time, memory and history' - Timothy Druckrey, 1991, we will be able to distort reality in photographs (brings up ideas of photographic truth), '... the reflection of reality reveals to us less about that reality than ever before' - Walter Benjamin, from Kleine Geschichte der Photographie
That we are so bombarded with imagery of bad things everyday that we become desensitised to it, 'The vast photographic catalogue of misery and injustice throughout the world has given everyone a certain familiarity with atrocity, making the horrible seem more ordinary - making it appear familiar, remote ("it's only a photograph"), inevitable' - Susan Sontag, 1977

How does Haveman counter these arguments?
Photographs have always been being 'manipulated'
Manipulation is more common now because of marketing and audience expectations rather than just because of digitisation

What are some of the ways photographs could be ‘manipulated’ prior to digitisation? (Pp. 50-51).
Retouching Reality: Staging photographs, only showing the prettiest/happiest scenes
In the Darkroom: Cropping, softening exposure, making selections etc

How does digitisation impact on different branches of photography?
"The answer to that question can vary considerably, according to the particular branch of photography."
Photojournalism/News Photography: They can now tidy up photos to make them more 'pretty', photographs shift even further away from 'reality'
War Photography: Concerns about 'truth' and ethics
Art Photography: Allowed them to more easily express themes and ideas they were already trying to express with analogue photography
Advertising Photography: Used to make things appear more appealing and to make things look like reality
Sports Photography: Photos can be deleted while at the event to free up more space on memory cards, therefore photographers can be taking photos constantly in order to get the best, most interesting shot

What effect have digital cameras had on the archiving of photographic images? (p.52).
We now archive far less images. We don't have hundreds of contact sheets or rolls of negative film, we can now delete images directly off of the camera as we go. Fewer pictures actually reach the printing stage. And often when digitally archiving pictures we select only the 'best' to save memory space.

What is Haveman’s argument about the effect of digitisation on images in the press?
Images were becoming cheaper and easier to source. Newspapers and magazines started using large scale colour photographs to catch the eye/attention of passers-by/potential buyers. Photographs started to accompany news stories to make them more meaningful and striking, but this turned into making events more beautiful and aesthetically pleasing than they were in order to appeal to viewers.

What other interesting points does Haveman make?
I found the points about staged photography interesting - "Was that man really standing there or did the photographer ask him to go and stand there?"
I agreed with the argument that we are becoming desensitised to horrible images of human's or nature's suffering because we are surrounded by these images everyday of our lives.
Photographs corrupt our view of reality.
I thought it was interesting that many of the writers seemed to think that non-intellectuals cannot see through the strategies of photography, when I think society as a whole does know that photographs do not equal reality - yet we often choose to overlook it.