The issue of originality has sparked huge debates. From the modernist obsession with originality to dismissing this element and despising it in postmodernism there is a great deal of polarization. Lets put aside the debate about originality and just remember that it is worth asking about a photograph if it is a cliché or if there is something different or that distinguishes it from other similar photos. InterpretationCulture Interpretation hand in hand with exegesis and hermeneutics can be insanely complex terrain. Suffice it to say in the case of this text it is worth focusing on the morphological what is in the photo and is not subject to discussion for example a photo is black and white or it is not it has a horizontal frame and not a vertical one.
On interpretation however it is always worth keeping e-commerce photo editing culture in mind about which we have also written previously as an element of reading that provides additional light to criticism. We have already written just above that there are objective elements in photography morphological and that they are not a matter of opinion. Personal preferences can be expressed and photography can be described in terms of the feelings and impressions it provokes in our minds. Thus we could make a very complete evaluation and find the photographic merits in a piece by JoelPeter feeling even horror.
And it is that our own circumstance can approach or repel us to a photograph. Thus a critic with small children may appreciate the merits of a photograph featured in World Press Photo but be horrified by the image of a childs corpse. Witkin Archive JoelPeter Witkin Then we also have to recognize and express what we feel and understand in terms of content meaning and what we feel when we see it. It is worth asking ourselves if we have understood what the artist wanted to communicate.
發表於 2022-9-10 16:41:33
