Response to the reading...Week 1

I’m pretty sure I’ve read this in a prior class, but here it goes anyway. The reading was interesting in the fact that it documented(ha ha…ugh) the history of documentary photography. Anything shot in the 19th century is considered doc photo, and it’s interesting to see where that all began. The wealthy sent out photographers to show the land and such. Its main source was for history for history’s sake, as well as science. As time went on, the allure of photography being associated with the hierarchy of society faded through technological advancements. People began to use photography for different means, and it wouldn’t become long for images to be taken for recreation, identification, social issues and other means. Along with this came the notion that some of these photographs weren’t as they were seen, that the photographer had altered the images’s scene in order to portray a more dramatic shot. To be honest, no matter how a photograph is taken, it is seen through the eye of that who has taken it, and therefore, it will never be 100% of what had happened. There will always be a sense of bias as to what should be shot. “I should capture this, no THIS…this will look a lot more interesting here.” Even though documentary has no final definition, I feel as if people should take it as they want to. They can believe an image is completely true, or they can believe something is up with it. To me it doesn’t matter, as everything in life needs to be taken with a grain of salt.