Is objectivity an illusion? What does objectivity mean to you? Is it something journalists should strive for? Why or why not?
[Ami Vitale said...] “Yes, I believe objectivity is an illusion but I also believe that there are a multitude of viewpoints and that no one “Truth” exists. I believe that unless we understand and give voice to these perspectives, reason remains veiled. Ignorance in each other’s stories leads us to assume we know them. It allows us to maintain perceptions of differences based on our own preconceived notions.”

I mostly agree with that. The phrase “no one ‘Truth’ exists” really threw me at first. Actually, I started writing this post to contradict what she said, but now having read it again a couple times, I think I see it a little differently. To start, I would make that a small t…but that is nit picking and most people would not catch the subtle difference.

If read in the context of covering stories and trying to understand others’ perspectives, I would agree that there is no one truth. Meaning, there is not that perfect set of photographs or those perfect words that say everything just exactly as it truly is, was, and will be. Who would deny that? It is a matter of wording, to some degree.

Going back to the big T Truth, though, this quote touches on a deeper reality. Reality, and thus truth, is extremely difficult to nail down, in a photo or with words, and I would not even say that is the end goal of photojournalism anyway. So, let’s just leave photojournalism for a moment.

Let’s call this spiritual photography. There is a reality, a Truth, present at all times and in every place, filling all things. So, is it possible to photograph that? I would say no. However, surely it is possible to photograph certain facets, images, reflections, or indicators of that true reality, though.

I do not seek to bring this out in every single photo. Sometimes it is good enough to just take a cute photo or a snapshot, but I still seek that reality. I want my photos not to force my point of view (which is more what I think Ami Vitale is talking about anyway…and trying to not do), but to try to dig for the deeper reality, call it the backstory or the Grand Mystery of Things. It is not about what I want my photos to communicate, but rather that I want my photos to make a hard link between the beauty of Truth and the viewer of the photo.

Well, I just read a great (mock) Rembrandt interview over at the Strobist. That is right, Rembrandt, in the not-so-flesh, is going on record to help us understand how he controls light to achieve his desired results. Warning: the Strobist is all about off-camera flash photography, so if that is not your thing, it might be too photo-techy. Of course, if photography and lighting ARE your thing, you might hurt yourself laughing! A work of genius! Laugh and learn.That Strobist entry really made me think more about how much photographers have to learn from the masters of painted art. So many lessons about lighting and composition are there for the gleaning. It is too easy to look at a painting, take it in on the surface, and never think about the details: the light, the colors, much less how those lessons could be applied to or accomplished in photography.

So, here’s to visual inspiration! It’s not just from movies, Flickr, or commercials. Let us pay attention to the established masters of visual art.