THE PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGE_ TAKEN OR MADE

Photographer is a massive part of everyday life, and with the popularity of new technology, it has become available to mostly everyone. As a Fashion and textiles student, photography is a very prominent and valuable part of my course: recording visual information for research, gathering evidence, photographing a final collection. It just wouldn't be possible to get across the same visual information without photography. We also view others work through the medium of photography to inspire our own work, to collect research towards our chosen theme- photography becomes a research tool.

'The photographer was thought to be an acute but non interfering observer- a scribe, not a poet. But as people quickly discovered that nobody takes the same picture of something, the supposition that cameras furnish an impersonal, objective image yielded to the fact that photographers are evidence not only of whats there but of what an individual sees, not just a record of what the viewer sees, but an evaluation of the world'. A camera takes a record of what the viewer sees, but at which point is the photograph made into an image? 

The subject of this lecture was a standing debate- is the photograph taken or made? When does photography change from merely a means of research to a work of art?
What makes an image true? A documented photo, used for research or evidence purpose, could be seen as a 'true' photo. However, a heavily constructed, changed photograph could be seen as untrue, as it no longer represents its original surroundings, the original view the photographer saw.  The photographers original meaning can be so easily changed – the opinion of the third party, context, publication, caption, text or cropping of the original image. The photo is wrongly portrayed, making it an untruth. The presentation of the image can also have a heavy effect on the image, distorting the original meaning- for example, in a newspaper or magazine, it could be altered by the writer.
Although perhaps images have been deliberately staged, perhaps to get across a deeper meaning or even to successfully sell. It seems all to easy for a photographer to change the perspective of the original view to create a false reality. The photographer is telling a story through visual language, but not necessarily a truthful story.

it is possible to tell a different story through the medium of photography- cropping the image to emphasise a particular part (therefore influencing the photo), or even the choice of black and white (b&w- Documentary, colour- pleasure). After all, it how you see the image and record it that changes the narrative- the camera doesn't just take the photo.
From the moment a photograph is taken, it becomes history and is changed by time and natural environment. So perhaps all photographs are untrue, and whether it be intentional or unintentional, they are all made.