Some thoughts on photography

In art form a photograph is an independent reality, not a slave of the reality whose image it captures. Its independence is seeded in the fact that it is not a true image, only a perspective in a particular moment. A ‘true image' photograph is an impossibility, because true image can not be separated from its reality either by space or time. In both separations image ceases to be true at the very moment of separation, for their flow into the future takes different paths-their similarity starts diverging. What may come closest to a ‘true image’ is reflection in mirror, and yet, it is also only partial in most cases.

In fact, the moment idea of a picture is conceived the path and destinies of the picture and subject begin to diverge. In conceiving itself factors like camera angle, lens, aperture diameter, exposure time, time of the day (the day itself! Rainy day, sunny day etc!), extra lighting, and focal point all play a transformational role: they change the reality of subject in favour of the reality of picture; and, also, capture only a part of the true (whole) image.

Also, ’True image’ as an idea is oxymoronic. Something that doesn’t exist. Can’t exist. For, there is no reality without a perspective. If it was otherwise then there would have been no distinction of “good photograph” and “bad photograph” of the same subject (reality). How you capture it makes that distinction. ‘How’ is the perspective- a distortion that work as a knife to scrap away the image from reality.

So, then, what is reality? Reality is a hint, a clue, a stimulus, a signal to be sensed with our five senses for arranging our thought. This arranging is important for that creates a semblance of living. Anger, fear, love, hate all are arrangement of thoughts in our head stimulated by hints that we call reality, and our perception of it.

A beautiful photograph is an amalgamation of the view, aesthetics, and emotions. “What” to capture dissolved in to “how” to capture and “why”, these coupled with “how much” to capture and “when” are the decisions to be made, which keeps the mind of photographer in a state of constant reviewing of thoughts evoked by the view in sight. It (this constant reviewing) is like first growing an ‘eye of mind’ to find beauty, and then leading biological eyes through a training where they learn from the ‘eye of mind’; and deepen, broaden, soften their understanding of beauty. The “eye of mind” is the emotional capability of brain which does the emotional referencing of things in sight, giving them a meaning, which biological eyes can not do. An ant carrying a load ten times it body weight and struggling up a wall is not a sight of visual beauty, but makes up for immense emotional beauty-for ant’s will-to-live despite life being so hard on it(from the human perspective of physical labour). So, despite the individual ugliness of the subject (ant, and the carcass of a dead moth perhaps!) it would make for a good picture for its emotional content; if the struggle part is suitably highlighted by capturing the relative size of ant and its load and the height it has covered, along with capturing, possibly, the distance it has yet to go. And, that will decide the “how much” (of what is in sight)to capture part.

-Pulastya