Photography: Digital Imaging Processes - Coursework Example

Advances in camera technology, and especially digital imaging processes, mean that photographs can no longer be considered objective renderings of the real world Abstract Photography is a method used to record images by the action of light or related radiation on a light sensitive material. Camera technology dates back to 1000AD when pin hole camera was invented. Photographic imaging was first carried out in 1827. Since then the technologies for capturing and printing images has evolved substantially. Digital camera technology emerged in 1950s and the development in the technology has been ongoing since then. Inkjet and laser based technologies have dominated digital printing. Analog photographs have been considered to provide some evidence about a certain scene. The credibility of this photography as a true reflection of world reality however changed with advent of digital technologies which have brought about increased subjectivity and reduced objectivity in photograph production. Thus most photographs produced digitally often reflect the intention of the artist rather than the causal action of the camera. This greatly reduces the objectivity of photographs as a true reflection of real world. the manipulation of original photos to come up with virtual reality implies that digital photos no longer objectively render the real world. however, using several analytical methods that are geared toward establishment of trustworthiness and authenticity of photos, those that discern objectively the real world can be realized. To establish trustworthiness and authenticity in digital photos involve discerning as coherence, relationship to visual evidence and provenance in addition to originality of the photos. This allows one to know whether the photograph objectively render the real world. Introduction For a long time, photographs have been considered true representation of reality (Terras, 2008). Unlike paintings, that one could paint anything that he/she imagined of, photographs had little influence from the photographer. Thus, they were considered a true evidence of something that exists (Susman, 2007). This was however only to true during the age of analogue photography. With the entry of digital printing, photographs can be manipulated in various ways to depict the intention of the artist (Arevalo, 2008). In this paper, we argue that even though photographs can be manipulated digitally, they still can depict reality when various methods of analysis are used to unravel the truth about the photo. Overview of Digital Imaging Photography is a method used to record images by the action of light or related radiation on a light sensitive material. The first photographic image was made in 1827 by Joseph Nicephore Niepce. Before this time, people used pinhole camera invented in 1000AD to view or draw purposes. The heliographs that were produced by Joseph Nicephore Niepce formed the prototype of present day photograph (Terras, 2008). The first practical process of photography was invented in 1839 by Louis Daguerre. The process allowed Daguerre to fix image onto a sheet of silver plated copper. The first negative was invented by Henry Fox Talbot (Gonzalez, 2009). The perfection of the negative process was attained in 1841. Photography was also heralded by the patenting of tintypes by Hamilton Smith in 1856 (Susman, 2007). Another development in photograph was when Frederick Scoff Archer invented wet plate negative in 1851. This was followed by the invention of dry plate negatives and hand held cameras in 1879 (Drafahl and Drafahl, 2005). Flexible roll film was invented by George Eastman in 1889. The first viable colour films were introduced in the market in 1940s (Arevalo, 2008). Digital camera technology has a direct relationship to technology that was used to record television images. In early 1950s, video tape recorder (VTR) was used for capturing live images from television cameras via conversion and saving of digital information onto magnetic tape. The invention of the charge coupled device (CCD) in 1969 by George Smith and Willard Boyle marked the beginning of digital imaging. The first video camera build based on CCD was in 1970 (Terras, 2008). The first prototype digital camera was produced in 1981 by Sony Corporation. The first computer based digital camera to be introduced in the market was the Apple quick take 100 camera that was introduced in 1994 (Susman, 2007). This was followed by Kodak DC40 camera and Casio QV-11 in 1995. The Cyber Shot Digital Still Camera produced by Sony was introduced in the market in 1996. It was Kodak that aggressively spearheaded campaigns for introduction of digital photography through collaborations with Kinko and Microsoft to create digital image making software (Arevalo, 2008). Kodak also collaborated with IBM to make internet-based network for exchanging digital images. The first colour inkjet printers that were able to complement the new digital camera images were produced by Hewlett Packard (Gonzalez, 2009). Digital printing differs from traditional printing methods in that it does not require printing plates. Inkjet and laser printers are the common methods used in digital printing. Fine art photography printing started in early 1990s with the costly and difficulty to operate Iris Graphics Model 3047 inkjet printer (Terras, 2008). The printer used water-soluble magenta, cyan, yellow and black dye based inks. Fine art Inkjet print resulted from digital proofing technology. Inkjet printing makes use of dye-based inks or lightfast pigment based inks (Arevalo, 2008). On the other hand, laser printing involves exposure of digital images onto true light sensitive photographic paper by use of lasers and then the image is processed in photographic fixers and developers (Gonzalez, 2009). In recent times Hewlett Packard and Canon have introduced in the market piezo and thermal head printers which use high stability, multi-colorant pigmented ink systems (Susman, 2007). The advent of Photoshop and other software used to edit digital photos have redefined fine art printmaking. Digital printing process begins with the capturing of the image. The image may be analogue that is converted to digital image, which is then manipulated on a computer system (Arevalo, 2008). Conversion of analogue image to digital image involves scanning of the image to create a digital copy. The image can also be captured directly using a digital camera (Terras, 2008). The captured image is then transferred to printing station under the direction of the computer. Digital technology prints in four-colour process. Image truth For long, photographs have been considered to provide some evidence about a certain scene. They try to depict how things were. As such, most people feel that a scene captured in a photograph provides credible evidence than any other type of evidence (Gonzalez, 2009). A photograph is likened to a fingerprint that is found at crime scene that implicates the owner for committing the crime. Thus, photographs have long been considered to be true records of scenes that are used to test, confirm and construct a total view of reality (Terras, 2008). Photographs have been known to avoid errors that were common in paintings to depict reality. Photographs are not merely considered to be pictures but rather formulae, which are used to evoke bits of reality. It is argued that photographs are rich in functionless details that are characteristics of realistic art (Susman, 2007). Thus, the camera has been considered to be an opportune instrument that is used to keep record accurate traces of the scenes before them in a supreme manner (Arevalo, 2008). The camera can capture finer details of a scene beyond the capability of a naked human eye. Photographs are argued to provide a strong bond between the referent scene and the image. The objectivity of a photograph is established through the fact that during the process of bond creation between reality and photograph human intervention is lacking (Gonzalez, 2009). The image is thus captured automatically and removes the control that may be vested in the author of a painting. The camera is the only intervening instrument that exists between the original scene and the image of the scene (Terras, 2008). Therefore, human influence in the capture of a scene is only restricted to the choice of the scene to be photographed and the reason for capturing the scene. This implies that photographic procedure helps to overcome subjectivity and to get the real truth. It is argued that subjectivity arising from human organization or selection is reduced by invoking the image of the camera (Susman, 2007). A photograph is considered to have a causal relationship rather than intentional relationship with the object. Therefore, a photograph is argued to be a true representation of a certain object (Susman, 2007). This implies that the image portrayed in a photograph is a true representation of an existing object. Thus, the relation between the object and its ideal photograph is characterized in terms of causal process rather than intention (Arevalo, 2008). The appearance yielded in a photograph is a record of how an actual scene looked rather than the realization of the intention. This characteristic differentiates a photograph from a painting (Terras, 2008). This shows that one can paint an angel but he/she cannot photograph an angel because of the nonexistence of angels (Gonzalez, 2009). This implies that a painting has a wider range of representation as opposed to a photograph, which only represents existing objects because there must be a causal relation between the images depicted in the photograph and the object referred to by the photograph. An image that is not a reflection of truth is characterized by many intentional acts. This gives rise to a non-algorithmic image. Such images are not a true depiction of an object that exists and does not provide reliable evidence about the object but rather provides much information about the intention of the artist (Terras, 2008). On the other hand, an image that is a true reflection of truth is characterized by automatic construction based on some form of data concerning the object and have fewer, if any, intentional acts (Susman, 2007). Such an image is considered to be algorithmic image and it provides less information about the artist’s intention but provides more evidence that is trustworthy about the scene that was in front of the system used to construct the image (Arevalo, 2008). The degree of algorithmic varies from image to image based on the level of manipulation by the artist to reflect his/her intention (Gonzalez, 2009). Thus, the veracity of a photograph can be attacked by suggesting that true standard procedure was not adhered to (Arevalo, 2008). On the other hand, the truthfulness of a photograph can be defended through production of confirmation indicating that true standard procedures were followed during its imaging. For instance, in the case of analogue photography, a negative may be produced to indicate that no alterations were made to the photograph (Terras, 2008). The advent of digital imaging has drastically changed the rules about the trustworthiness of a photograph. Digital imaging allows the artist to manipulate the photograph in various ways to attain his intention (Susman, 2007). For instance, the photographer may use different procedures and devices to map intensities in a scene and different sources may be used to provide image fragments that are seamlessly combined. Thus digital imaging allows artist to arbitrary intervene in the construction of an image (Arevalo, 2008). Such interventions are often not easy to detect. This makes it difficult to distinguish between the camera’s causal process and the artist’s intentional process (Gonzalez, 2009). The result is that the image produced is less algorithmic and thus lies in between in between the spectrum of algorithmic image and a non-algorithmic image (Susman, 2007). This can be illustrated by the image below in which a lightening was intentionally placed in a true photograph of Golden Gate Bridge. The photo shows how digital image can be constructed to portray the intention of the artist by combining the causal process of the camera and the intentional process of the artist. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.danheller.com/images/California/SanFrancisco/GoldenGate/ggb-lightning-big.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.danheller.com/images/FAQ/Business/Manip/img1.html&h=325&w=500&sz=41&tbnid=_8ue410MFQ8oKM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=138&zoom=1&usg=____lksYkrHremfhBRJFRz-vHk9zM=&docid=4uUdxx_YWwK6-M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1z8jUPPUJ-eb1AWA-oHwDQ&ved=0CDwQ9QEwAg&dur=12 Thus, the reality depicted by a digital image is thus questionable and needs further analysis to establish their trustworthiness (Gonzalez, 2009). Proponents of photo manipulation via digital means argue that photography is an art and hence it ought to depict the purpose of the art form. In this case, photos need to be manipulated to evoke emotion or reaction to achieve their role as art forms (Terras, 2008). Another school of though argue that photography as an art form need to depict the intention of the artist. Thus, through manipulation of the photo, an artist is able to convey his/her intention to the viewer of the image (Arevalo, 2008). Image authenticity The authenticity of an image can be established through coherence, provenance, and its relationship to visual discourses (Susman, 2007). Establishing coherence existence in a photo allows the analyst to point out whether the photo is a true depiction of a true record. In this case, the analyst seeks to establish whether the visual evidence in the image really hangs together. Any inconsistencies in an image can help the analyst to establish that the image presented is not a true representation of the object that was captured (Terras, 2008). The evidence provided by parts of the image allows the analyst to provide the possible interpretation of the whole image (Gonzalez, 2009). Identification of inconsistencies and checking of the visual evidence allows the analyst to establish whether the photograph is a transcription of true physical scene or object. Only suspicious frame of mind is able to make out inconsistencies in a photograph (Arevalo, 2008). Suspicious mind will likely unravel spurious in a photo and hence the authenticity of the image. Thus, the authenticity of a photo can be established by analyzing coherence in its features. The relation between the images to visual discourses can also enable one to distinguish between a real image and one that has been manipulated digitally. The plausibility of the facts purported by the image can indicate the reality of the image (Susman, 2007). The purported facts need to be consistent with other facts that are believed to be true. The plausibility of an image cannot be evaluated only by in-built commonsense but also by the positioning of the analysts discourses and the stored facts. Thus, plausibility of a photograph is relative to an existing structure of knowledge and ideological framework (Terras, 2008). Therefore, when a photograph is crosschecked against the existing truth, its authenticity can be established. Suspicion usually arises from an image, which is proffered to indicate an extravagant or surprising claim and yet provides few or no confirmable specifics (Arevalo, 2008). In some instance, the visual evidence provided by an image usually supports alternative assertions and hence the analyst must decide on which alternative is more plausible (Gonzalez, 2009). The trustworthiness of photo is seen in the ability of the visual evidence to support the caption and the plausibility of the caption to reconcile with real facts. The provenance of an image can also help to support its authenticity. This can be established by seeking evidence to support the claim portrayed in the photo (Arevalo, 2008). Provenance analysis may seek to establish the time and place where the photo was captured and the photographer. Information about these three issues may provide the truth on whether the facts presented in the caption are real and authentic (Koelling, 2004). Image originality Originals of an image differ from its copies. Originals are more valuable as compared to copies. Captions by camera are usually difficult to establish the originals (Gonzalez, 2009). For instance, question arises on whether the negatives are the originals or the print. The situation is even complex in case of digital images where no unique negatives are available (Terras, 2008). The only distinguishing factor in digital images is the date copied since quality is often the same. In most cases, digital images are synthesized by application of rendering procedures to geometric data. Thus, it is not easy to establish the originals (Susman, 2007). The problem of distinguishing originals and copies can be clarified using one stage and two stage arts. Many images involve two stage productions. For instance, digital images are first encoded before being displayed (Arevalo, 2008). The originals and copies distinction can also be clarified in terms of autographic and allographic arts. An art that can be denoted in definite notation is said to be allographic whereas one that cannot be denoted in definite notations is said to be autographic. Digital images are two-stage, allographic that can be instantiated mechanically. A true record of display is one that involved automatic image capture process, employed image file that had exact copy of originally captured image, and applied correct interpretation of algorithm. When these conditions are in place, then much confidence can be placed in the originality of the image (Susman, 2007). However, it is usually difficult to meet all these conditions especially in digital images and hence originality of such images is questionable (Gonzalez, 2009). Thus, it is not easy to establish the provenance of digital images. Conclusion Digital printing has changed the representation of photographs as an existing reality. Digital imaging allows manipulation of original photos to come up with virtual reality. Thus, in most cases digital photos do not objectively render the real world. However, by use of analytical methods aimed at establishing the trustworthiness and authenticity of a photograph one can determine whether a photograph objectively renders the real world. During the analysis issues such as coherence, relationship to visual evidence and provenance in addition to originality can help to unravel whether a photograph depicts the real world objectively. It should however be noted that it is not easy to prove all these issues. References Arevalo, J. 2008. Retinal Angiography and Optical Coherence Tomography. Sydney: Springer Drafahl, J., and Drafahl, S. 2005. Digital Imaging for the Underwater Photographer, 2nd Ed. Sydney: Amherst Media, Inc. Gonzalez. 2009. Digital Image Processing, 3rd Ed. London: Pearson Education Koelling, J. 2004. Digital Imaging: A Practical Approach. London: Rowman Altamira Susman, G. 2007. Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and the Global Economy. New York: Edward Elgar Publishing Terras, M. 2008. Digital Images for the Information Professional. London: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Read More