To say “All photographs are accurate. None of them tell the truth” is a blatant misreading of humanity. To be human is to be flawed, why should our art forms be any different? Photography is art, it expresses, conveys, and relates. It is passionate, emotional, and intelligent. Yet, most finally, it is flawed.

It is like any art form, any speech, any poem, any painting; it lies. And often times these lies are used to break through to a greater truth, to a nobler idea. Nothing is more common than a piece of art—whether it is writing, painting, photography, etc—that twists a certain concept to aim for greater truths. Yes, “to frame is to exclude”, but the opposite is also true—to frame is to enlighten. By framing—by “excluding”—are we not concentrating on a certain part of the photo in order to bring out otherwise unapparent thoughts and impressions?

The same goes for writing. When we twist our speech in poetry and use words and phrases with double meanings, are we not lying, are we not saying one thing but in reality, meaning another? Perhaps all great art lies. Maybe if it didn’t lie it wouldn’t be great. But to say that these art forms discard truth is wrong. By lying, are we not creating an instance of greater truth? Are we not able to more clearly see a larger metaphor for life by twisting the picture, by twisting our words, by twisting our brush strokes?

If one looks for anything created by a human that is barren of lies, devoid of misconceptions, sterile of insecurities, then I’m afraid one will spend an eternity on a fruitless quest. Everything touched by humans is harsh, and can be portrayed as a lie. Everything is subject to interpretation and it is this interpretation that makes lying so hard. Is it truly a lie when someone whole-heartedly believes in what they are saying? Can a photograph lie when it is just a representation of what another believes, of what the photographer believes? If this is true, then the definition of lying will need revision.

People who are "dinosaurs" who live in the past, reveling in the power of written words, who cannot acknowledge photography as an art form do not belong in the 21st century. Some feel that photography freezes time, and thereby in that stillness doesn’t allow for new growth as in a painting, revealing new ideas each time. Well, perhaps these past views need to be forgotten as so much coprolite, and buried with their incredulity.

It is true, however, that pictures are dangerous tools. They are dangerous in their apparent innocence, they are dangerous in their exploitation of emotion, they are dangerous for their biased beauty. Yet, without them I would feel blind. They enable us to see horrors within other people’s lives, they empower us with the beauty of a secluded rainforest in the heart of the Amazon, they emblazon us with anger, greed, love, and passion. Is this not art?

Art is an ingrained part of humanity because of the emotions it allows us to feel. A picture is no different. At times it seems when I look at a particularly powerful photo, that I am tasting a fine wine. I open the bottle—a bottle that was corked when the picture was taken—containing different sights, smells, and intrigue. I then sample it, and see if its stillness has any effect on my palette. It is this ability to capture a moment in time forever that is the power of a photograph—whether or not it affects another, depends on the interpretation—the palette—of the connoisseurs.

Photography does not reveal truth. Truth is defined as “a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, or principle.” The law of gravity is truth. The mortality everything on earth is truth. Mathematics, science; this is truth. Photography is emotion, a man-made thing that does not define truth. Photography is interpretation. Photography is ART. Sure, a picture shows exactly what was before the camera’s lens at an exact moment in time. But the photographer chooses which way to face the camera and when to press the button. A picture does not show anything outside of the frame, or whatever happened before or after the picture was taken. It is only a snippet of reality. A piece of ARTWORK. Sure, a picture of a dead body is exactly that, a dead body. We are supposed to feel sadness, horror, anger at the powers that be for causing this person to die in this way. But what if that dead body were Hitler, or Stalin, or Hussein? Would you still feel sorry for them? Would you still feel sadness, horror, anger? Let’s try another example: say you saw a picture of a Muslim man in a turban holding a gun above a bloody carcass of an American woman? You would assume that this man is a terrorist and deserves to die himself, right? But what if this man was in fact being attacked by this woman, and killed her in protection of himself and his two children (who are outside the frame of the picture)? Photographs do not tell truth. Even pictures of dead bodies and ransacked cities do not reveal the entire truth. Anything man-made—war, politics, emotion, even history—cannot have truth. As Mr. Geib is fond of saying, “The victor writes the textbooks.” Purely human institutions are like fashion trends; “in” one minute, “out” the next, and then back “in” again. Depending on what era you were born in, you either believe in slavery or you don’t. Yet the fact remains that African-Americans, and all other races for that matter, are our biological and genetic equals. Republican conservatism used to be “in,” but now the trend is switching to liberal Democratic beliefs. Truth is everlasting, whether we know about it or not.

In short, “All photographs are accurate. None of them is the truth.”

“All photographs are accurate. None of them is the truth.”

Photography vs. text. One cannot stand on it’s own. Photography and text are like the tasty combination of the delicious peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

I had to read this quote over and over a few times to finally come up with a response. Overall, I do agree with this statement. Yes, photographs are accurate. Each may have a truth, mainly based on the photographer and viewer’s perception, but none can have THE TRUTH. No one knows The Truth. People may know a truth. This type of truth helps direct people towards morals and guidelines in their lives, or maybe even exposes them to a view not ever seen. There is nothing wrong with these types of truth. The same goes for text. When I read about philosopher’s beliefs (thank you Sophie’s World), I find that each claim that they know a truth about mankind, about living, and about existence. “Live life with acts of kindness and kindness will be directed towards you.” Don’t be selfish.” “Money can cause corruption.”

I don’t ever think that one can ever know The Truth. Philosophers, teachers, doctors, priests, musicians, historians, police officers, President George Bush, the neighbors next door, no one will ever know. In a religious point of view, to know The Truth, one would have to be God. God is considered perfect, but why? He knows The Truth. Of course, that is just my opinion.

Photography is beautiful. Words are insightful (with the exception of some). It is quite astonishing to think that a man made tool, so to speak, can have such a grasp on a person’s emotions. A picture of a loved one. A picture of a family vacation destination. A picture of an unstoppable disaster. A picture of nature in the morning. How is it that pixels and colors make the heart beat with such curiosity and passion? A book about a world leader. A book about gardening. A book about fitness. A book about fine cuisine. A book about the funny things in a teenager’s life. Words may seem so overrated at times, but they still continue to enthrall the human mind into reaching deeper for more.

One may say a picture may mean one thing. Another person may have a different analysis. In the end, differences in perception are what make pictures so great. There is no right answer. Anyone can get a sense of value in a photograph. If there was only one restricted meaning for each photo in the world, photography would not be as useful.

It would be bland, just like gum on the bottom of a shoe.

Essentially.

I love taking photos with my rusty digital camera. I take pictures of my nieces, nature, when I see something interesting, when I go on a trip, etc. I take shots of what I choose to display on my screen; the camera cannot capture the whole situation, but it can capture a moment. The camera is in my possession, and I have the power to choose the puzzle piece of the scene that I want. Now, when I print that photo and someone that was not with me the day I took it, cannot see the rest of the puzzle pieces.

Now, more than just pictures that I take, I think that pictures that show us about our history are very important. I can read about the war in Iraq; words that are extremely descriptive. I can go on reading and reading without any photos. The words can make me know, but it leaves a feeling like walking the world blind. When I see the photos I feel more emotion, it all seems more real to me; the world is made of shapes, colors, shades, tones - not of words. It is also true that we can create color with words, but not like photos. The words can make us imagine the situation; we can create the picture in our minds, but yet it cannot compare to a photo.

All photos have missing ends in order to let the viewer search for what is not visible. It might be a bundle of lies of what is missing, when we try to imagine what could be there. But by placing the missing ends, even if they might not be accurate, we are getting closer to the greater truth. There are different ways of looking at a photograph. Some might argue about the deeper meaning of a photograph; and the different perspectives, I believe, is a way of getting to the greater truth. I believe that it is not all about the photograph but also the minds of people that tumble through it and make an attempt to look beyond the dimensions of the photo. The truth is not in the photo, it is in the mind of the viewer.

A few years from now, I will look at all the photos I have taken, and all that I have yet to take. I will look at them and I will smile, laugh, and cry. The photos; the memories; they are more than a thousand words.

During my long drive home on a beautiful Saturday afternoon, I realize something profound: the world around me is framed in my windshield. If I freeze my windshield to a picture it includes the road I’m on, a car on the other side, trees and bushes and the sky above. I can only observe the roughness of the road, the whiteness of the car, the beauty of the few trees and the light blue of the sky. The picture only shows exactly what I am seeing. It does not inform me whether the road will be smoother or continue to be rough. It does not tell me who the driver is of the other car or where they are heading. It does not tell me if the trees will continue down the road or if they are only off to the side of me. It does not tell me if there are ominous dark clouds over the mountains. Instead of focusing on the bad, I like to think of what the picture does tell me. The road is leading me to my destination. The other car drove past me at that exact moment. The trees are gorgeous shades of orange and red. The sky is clear and it is a beautiful day. To me, my freezed windshield shows me much more than it leaves out. I can always vividly remember this moment in time by a picture and remember how beautiful that day was.

The same goes for any photography. Although the photo may leave many questions unanswered, much can be gained from the captured moment. A picture from the Civil War will give us a clearer idea of what it was like. We can observe the soldier’s uniform, his weapon and where he was. Just by looking at a picture we can determine the conditions of the soldiers. We can examine his nutrition, hygiene and emotion. All of these facts are crucial to the study of such a period in time. Just by seeing a picture of a battlefield scattered with dead, we can see the terrible loss. It is much more valuable than our imagination. On the other side of the coin, photography can be upsetting and have bad ramifications. Some photos may be set up to misrepresent the situation. Other photos can be staged to reenact a battle or war strategy. Avedon hit the nail on the head, “All photographs are accurate. None of them is the truth.” These photos do not necessarily lie, they show their subject accurately. It is, rather, the way they are used by the person to persuade a falsehood.

I do believe that the quote saying, “All photographs are accurate. None of them is the truth” is correct. I think that a photograph is in fact accurate but the truth is not always revealed. Besides, what is truth but a person’s biased story of a situation?

Photographs are accurate at displaying that moment in reality but what they tell is something that requires the words of another person. Some photos, without the use of Photoshop, can tell straight out lies and can fool a person without any background knowledge of the event occurring. What I mean by this is that some photos that have been taken-i.e. “Dead Troops Talk”-have been staged to emphasize a point that the photographer might be trying to make. Some other examples are the advertisements that we see on the gigantic billboards today. The people who made the commercials scripted everything that was supposed to happen and make an advertisement that would sell whatever they wanted. Nowadays, they even have to ability to hide the truth all together. For example, those “weight-loss” pills that you see on TV! If they had actually wanted to tell you the truth, they could have said that these pills in fact are placebos and don’t do anything to help you lose weight except for psychological help. But instead, they leave that to you to find out for yourself-after you’ve spent hundreds of dollars on them that is.

From the beginning, photos have had the ability to lie but now in this day and age, things like Photoshop make it even easier to lie! For example, take the video clip that Mr. Geib showed us about that lotion product. On top of putting on the high-end makeup, they even took the person’s picture and altered her real appearance it in Photoshop like raising her head so he neck looked longer and even narrowing her face so she looked skinnier. It doesn’t really help that the same photos that we used to record happy moments in our lives are the same photos that are leeching away at our wallets (purses for you ladies).

Another thing that can justify the falseness of the photos’ “truth” is the people themselves. For example, when Mr. Dinkler made us do that one project analyzing the “truth” from different people on the same story, we found that each person had a different story because they had their own opinion lodged into it making it a biased story.

As for the part about photos better than text or visa versa, I think that none is better than the other but instead have their strong points in different categories. Text is effective in telling a story and pulling you into its world. With the use of metaphors and similes and all the other literary devices, text can create a whole new world and bring you to that imaginary world that is not in the one bit real. Pictures, show you what is happening the moment that shutter opens and closes or the moment the brush touches the canvas. But, the text that you read can’t show you how vibrant the blissful colors are or how dark of a hue the somber sky is they all go off of your own imagination. Pictures on the other hand show you the vividness of the scene without having to show you but can not tell you what happened before, after, or even at that moment of to the side. In Vincent Van Gogh’s painting, “Wheatfield with Crows”, Van Gogh shows us the movement in the still picture and the heavy contrast between the bright wheat stalks and the dark sky. But what the picture doesn’t show is that before that, there was a gunshot that made the crows scatter to the sky and that Van Gogh would die 2 days after completing this portrait. That is where text comes in. With the help of text, we can understand what is occurring before, during, and after the portrait/ photograph is made. That is the reason why there are usually captions under each picture. Take the infamous picture during the Tét Offensive during the Vietnam War. Everybody knows it but what they don’t know is that the man being shot is in fact a Viet Cong captain, who killed civilians in cold blood, was dressed in civilian clothes in order to confuse enemy troops. Many who saw this picture, including Michael T., thought it was the other way around and that the man in uniform-who was actually a South Vietnamese National Police officer-was a Viet Cong and was shooting one of our allies. But now, with captions, we have the words to guide us through the fog and help us understand. But even so, if you were to show a former Viet Cong veteran this picture, he would say negative stuff about it and say that that was unjust and that the caption is wrong. So it seems that there will never be a true story of a caption behind a picture just a biased one.

Photographs aren’t the truth. Text isn’t the truth. Paintings aren’t the truth. Sculptures aren’t the truth. Movies aren’t the truth. Music isn’t the truth. What you see, hear, feel, taste, and smell is the truth…for an instant. Then in becomes memory, and memory isn’t the truth. This paragraph about what is and isn’t the truth isn’t the truth. All are based on interpretation: your interpretation, the artist’s interpretation, what some expert thinks the artist’s interpretation was (even though they really have no clue and are relying on pure speculation).

All photographs might be accurate, but interpretations aren’t. The classic example of this is Eddie Adams’ “Viet Cong Execution.” Adams once said, “I think two people died in that picture: not only the man he shot, but [the chief of police].” He has said that people have interpreted his picture in order to condemn the chief of police and ignore the crimes of the other man, but he still doesn’t understand why.

I think that the true beauty of photographs is that they do frame and exclude; they have the ability to filter out distractions. They allow us to dial into a specific part of the world that we could never see before because of what I call our “peripheral vision,” that is, our ability to see the context around us. A photograph says, “Hey, hey! Look at me! I’ve been right here all along, but have you ever really looked at me? Would you ever have noticed me if I wasn’t in a photo?” Sometimes, it is important to look at the “small picture” to gain a better understanding of the “big picture.”

Other artists just have to deal with their imaginations. A painter can make a painting anyway he imagines. A musician can record a song that was once only found in their head. Photographers oftentimes have to get lucky. As John Stewart put it, “If you’re at the right exhumation of the right mass grave at the right time with the right camera and capture just the right combination of anguish and loss, [the Pulitzer Prize] is all yours!” Of course, photographers have developed many tricks to lessen the amount of luck they have to rely on: tricks about where and when and how to take the best photographs; tricks about how to make real life sexier and flashier through their use of the camera. But even the most planned out and posed photograph has an element of surprise in it. The moment the shutter opens, anything can happen—an unplanned look in someone’s eye, the slightest shift in a subject’s body position, the illumination from a light or the sun shifts wavelengths almost imperceptibly—which might ever so slightly change what the photographer saw in their imagination.

In fact, some of the most famous photographs are legendary because of these unplanned elements. Jack Thornell’s picture of James Meredith being shot also faintly shows the sniper in the background of his photo, even though Thornell had not seen him during the shooting. The ultimate example of an unplanned photo is Thomas Kelly’s famous picture of the murderer Richard Gries charging him, which was taken when Kelly accidentally shot the photo without realizing it.

So I guess it doesn’t matter that photos aren’t the truth (few things are). It’s their accuracy that entices you. It is the fact that they are spontaneous and that they filter out distractions that continues to draw you in.