In today’s society, we have come to expect some degree of alteration in all of our photography. The alterations come in various forms and in a wide range of degrees of severity: they may come from airbrushing celebrities and models in magazines or may come from taking bits of several electronic images and merging them together to create a completely different image. Unlike when photography first became popular, we do not expect images that are featured in the media to be absolute truths; the previous “common sense” knowledge that “the camera was there, so this must have happened!” is no longer in play.
In fact, I think we are more intrigued by images that compel our imagination than images that have not been touched. We have begun to utilize “photoshopping” technologies to our advantage, sparking consumer interest in advertising campaigns and peaking viewers’ curiosity in television, film, and commercials. On this website, http://www.noupe.com/photoshop/45-brilliant-examples-of-photo-manipulation-art.html , I found a compilation of manipulated images that I found extremely impressive, since they look like they could be real (well…besides for the fact that most of these things could never happen in real life…). “Photoshopping” helps us to take several images and combine them into one image that we may never see in real life—it permits for endless imagination and creativity.
These images are amazing digital works of art. I wonder, though, did the digital artist have to ask the “owner” of each utilized image for their permission? The boundaries of copyright laws are still a mystery to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment