This isn't photography

Every hear someone pontificate how superior film is over digital photography. I have, ad nauseam. If you've been lucky enough to evade this conversation here it is, minus the elitist bs: film was pure and took real talent, unlike digital and there was no photoshop trickery either.

Like many things people romanticize about, the nostalgia is based primarily on fantasy. Photographers have been manipulating photos since the very beginning, like 1860's beginning. Abe Lincoln's head was "photoshopped" onto John Calhoun's body. Yup 1860's. And you've seen it, it is probably the most view manipulated image ever, it was on the original five dollar bill.

Of course the process was performed by a specialist in a darkroom filled with a red glow and the smell of developer. Ahh, developer. I can still smell it and the memory brings me right back to high school. The whole development process wasn't something everyone knew about and it was shrouded in the mystery of the darkroom. My familiarity to the process is what causes my eyes to roll when I hear someone say "this isn't real photography."

Today photo manipulation can be done by anyone. The camera on most phones can do it for crying out loud. This new proximity to the post production process has certainly demystified the whole thing, opening the door for the pure image fantasy. I hold a fondness for the darkroom and the analog process of creating images. But I will never go back. Never. The notion of a pure image is simply ludicrous.

Self portrait, photoshopped

Photographers, of film or digital, edits an image with the their lens, color balance, shutter speed, iso, depth of field and what they chose to include/exclude in the frame, all before they even press the shutter. Yah, ok that's not quite photoshopping an image, but then again this dude (Jerry) never had photoshop and I can not create as powerful images as he did. And I'm crazy good with photoshop.

Jerry Uelsmann was making these images at a time when computers were the size of buildings. He still does, btw. He was one of the best, but make no mistake, he was not the only one. Photo manipulation is as old as photography itself, and it is was common.

Uelsmann 1976

Jerry is one of my hero's and is a big reason I have studied visual communication to the extent I have. I designed my degree at Metro combining programming and digital imaging because I see the web and software as a platform for visual communication. Seeing how Jerry creates stories and engages his audience is really inspiring to me. I often think of his approach and mindset to his work when I make an image.


There is a video on Lynda.com about Jerry and his wife Maggie. Maggie's work is the modern version of Jerry's work, she is making digital photographic art. The documentary is really well done and gives a cool insight to both of their works. It also looks at the attitudes of people toward their art. If you have time it's worth checking out. Or you can just watch the trailer to get the gist of it.