Photographs, and images more generally, are sites of conflict over meaning and representation. So much of the struggle in discussing photographs stems from the notion that photos are “true” in some sense, or less subjective than say painting or drawing, if only as a slice of a scene in a given context, in that specific moment in time. These conflicts, this messiness that happens when investigating images, is what continues to fascinate me about visual culture: there isn’t one True Meaning. It’s not new to suggest that historians adopt critical methodologies to analyze images as clearly and rigorously as textual sources; perhaps the increase in scholarly work in new media will help address this need as more scholars are trained and become more competent at preparing and dealing with images first-hand.
There’s an element of staging/posing in any photograph. It’s easy to recognize in, for example, studio portraits and Alexander Gardner’s famous Civil War images from Antietam, but also present in every decision to compose, crop, and focus while taking a photo. The furor over the FSA photos and the more recent discussions surrounding Photoshop are high-profile examples, but it’s good to remember that those questions can easily be applied to any photograph from any period–knowing the technical limitations of the processes changes the specifics but not the underlying debates.
The relationship of photo to caption, as discussed here in relation to Rothstein’s FSA photos, highlights how much text can influence the viewers understanding of an image. The author, Errol Morris, rightfully points out that “to fake a photograph you don’t need Photoshop; just rewrite the captions.” A viewer’s understanding of a photograph often comes from the caption, since people are more used to “reading” words than pictures. This is a continuing concern for me as I dabble with digital presentations of my research projects, which are dependent on images. While I want to caption/credit images properly, I’m hesitant to put captions immediately visible under the images, because I’ve become more aware that people are likely to glance over the caption for basic information about what the image is about before investigating the image itself. I’ve seen this in people perusing museums, and I’ve noticed that in my peers who have reviewed drafts of projects. For my final project for Clio1 I worked on a Prezi version of one of my thesis chapters, and got the idea from Prof. Gibbs to put all of the caption information in micro-text. The information was there, but the images dominated. This is an issue I know will continue to bedevil my work, how to balance providing information for my reader and also achieve my goal of foregrounding images as more than illustrations. Hopefully, the more I learn about coding and design and such the more deftly I can strike this balance.
*Update: this week I commented on Chris’ and Megan’s blogs while riffing off Geoff and David’s discussions for this week.
4 thoughts on “the magic (aka manipulation) of images”
I’m not so sure that I agree with Morris’ assertion about the power of image captions. I agree that they are (or can be) powerful, I think that he is giving too little credit to the images itself. That is especially true for the FSA photos because of their content in capturing the people and places of the Great Depression Era. I see abject poverty, failing soil, and a nation in crisis in these photos without reading a thing about them. While its true I’m not coming to these images for the first time and without preconceived notions about the era I still think that images can have inherent power and meaning, though this meaning can certainly be manipulated.
I think you make a really great point about how people use images. Most people just quickly glance at an image and then read the captions to learn what they can about it, there’s very little (if any) critical analysis of the image itself. These past two weeks I’ve been thinking a lot about a “history box” program at the VHS entitled “Teaching with Photographs: Virginia at the Turn of the 20th Century.” The premise of the program was to teach participants about basic photographic analysis and through that about life in VA at the turn of the 20th century. Often before we’d analyze an image, we’d ask the participants what they thought they saw in the image and why. Their assumptions, while not necessarily far off base, were frequently just as interesting as the “facts” in the photo. Your comments also bring to mind the idea of how an image is used that several of our classmates have brought up. As you pointed out, if you want the image to have more weight than it might behoove you to minimize the importance of the captions, but still provide. Or in case of Richard’s C.O.R.E. image. He wants to use it to show the peaceful protests, but as of now the protesters and police kind of get lost between the buildings and the street. Properly cropping the image would help emphasize the protestors. Also Sheri talked the different ways and meanings different people place into photographs and how that shapes our understanding of the image. All in all, we have much to consider when utilizing images.