Are Rules for Fools?
Are there rules of composition? How can an art form have rules? Are rules only for fools, or can they offer guidance for “wise men”? The answer hinges, as so many disputes do, on an ambiguity. The notion of a “rule” is used sometimes as a norm instructing us how we are to behave, and sometimes as a way of talking about a generalisation. Understanding this distinction can help us understand how both sides of this debate can be correct, but in different senses of the phrase “rules of composition”.
Does Originality Matter?
Have you ever found yourself fretting about whether your work is “original” enough? In the minds of most people, it seems, originality or novelty is absolutely central to art. Indeed, for many, it is axiomatic that if some work is not “original” – if it is “derivative” or has been “all done before” – it lacks real artistic merit. Moreover, to characterise a work as “highly original” is itself to issue praise, quite apart from any other aspects of the work. I think that there is something wrong in such ideas, or at least confused or ambiguous.
The clone wars: Is cloning out okay?
When may we clone out an element of an image? How much image manipulation is too much? These questions often divide photographers - especially landscape photographers. On the one hand we have those who prioritize the documentary aspect of landscape photography, and who insist that nothing is to be added or removed from an image. On the other hand we have those who emphasize the creative aspect of landscape photography, and who view such constraints as anathema to artistic freedom. In this blog I explore the ethical issues at the heart of this divide.
Unravelling Our Experience
In this blog I make the case that debates over the acceptable limits of cloning and image manipulation more generally need to take into consideration the complexities of human experience. I argue for two main claims: 1) That the visual experiences that we use as the basis for our judgments about the authenticity or otherwise of an image is nothing like a camera sensor recording light, and 2) that the central aspect of our experience relevant in this debate is our aesthetic response to the world. I further argue that whilst many such aspects of our experience may be shared in common with others, they are always conditioned by our circumstances and histories.
The Inner Reality
One of the perennial questions that photographers face is whether or to what extent they may manipulate their image or clone elements into or out of their image before it becomes “fake”. This question has become especially pressing now we have entered an era where AI tools give us the power to seamlessly change or remove anything, even entire skies, at the click of a button.
This is, fairly obviously, an ethical question, but in this blog I look at the more metaphysical question that lies behind it, especially as it applies to landscape or nature photography: Given that we have a duty not to avoid “fake” images, what is the reality against which we should judge the image. I argue that it is an inner reality that is the legitimate ground for judgments of fakery or authenticity, not the external reality we naively presuppose.
Why I Left Facebook and Instagram
In November 2024 I decided to stop posting my images to Facebook or Instagram and have deleted all my earlier images. But do not fear: Anyone interested in my photography can either get a free account on Flickr and follow me there (Flickr is where my new images usually first appear), or you just sign up to my Newsletter on my website.