Questioning photographs as Primary sources

jonniebgood1

This is a report on an artist questioning how images can be used as definitive sources for representing the reality of a particular situation or conflict.

In the project “Fatescapes,” the visual artist Pavel Maria Smejkal goes a step further and forces us to reconsider the veracity of historical images and the photographer’s role by digitally removing the people that made these images resonant. What is left is the scene as it might have looked just minutes before or after the photographer passed by. These images are reminiscent of a time, before Photoshop, when photographs were believed to be a reflection of reality. Mr. Smejkal’s alterations question whether photographs should be viewed as accurate representation. http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/iconic-scenes-revisited-and-reimagined/?pagewanted=all

For example he uses the example of Eddie Adams and this Photograph.





The altered image showing how the same scene may have been 10 minutes earlier is this:


More info on Eddie Adams regarding this photo is at http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/19/the-pulitzer-eddie-adams-didnt-want/

The information about the use of photos to record history is at http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/iconic-scenes-revisited-and-reimagined/?pagewanted=all

Manach

Any primary source by itself has a foundation of one support. For instance the infamous series of photos showing Lenin addressing a revolutionary crowd where the old bolshiveicks were removed person by person as they fell out of favour. This occurred long before photographs.
My opinion is that visual representations are an excellent primary source, but it is always necessary to have the historical context as well.

slowburner

In my opinion, any form of digitised photograph is questionable as a primary source.
Original photographic prints, on the other hand, are invaluable as a primary source.

In the past, if a photograph was to be used in evidence, it was a legal requirement to have the person who developed the film present in court to vouch for its authenticity.
I wonder what the legal requirements are today with digital photography as a form of evidence.

pedroeibar1

Manach wrote: »

My opinion is that visual representations are an excellent primary source, but it is always necessary to have the historical context as well.

+1. There is also the example of the nurse who was airbrushed out of P Pearse's surrender.
P.