Filed under: Uncategorized
Manipulation of photos is not a new phenomenon. In “Can Photos be Trusted?”, Steve Casimiro provides examples of photo manipulation from the 1870s when spirit photographs were all the rage. In addition, in “Photo Tampering Throughout History,” Hany Farid (who many of the readings cite as an expert on discovering changes in photographs) lists many historical examples of photographs that were changed through different methods. One interesting photo he examines is a famous picture of Abraham Lincoln which is a composite of Lincoln’s head on the body of John C. Calhoun. What this shows is that photo doctoring is not new, but what has changed is the methods that are used. In today’s world, photographs are changed through digital programs like Photoshop. So what does this mean for historians?
Photographs must be analyzed critically, similar to any other sources a historian uses. People understand that pictures can and are easily altered in today’s world. For example, magazines consistently photoshop their cover pictures of celebrities. Rather than worry about the problems of digital changes in photographs, I think historians in the future might ask why these photos were altered. What was the message that the person who manipulated the photo was trying to convey? How do these photos reflect the state and issues of society during a certain time? Why are pictures so heavily manipulated in some print mediums (i.e. magazines like GQ or Redbook?) versus The New York Times? Instead of looking at these photos as a problem for future historians, maybe we should look at them as a interesting source that shines light on ideas about concepts of beauty, diversity, race, and politics in the world today.
Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment
