My question is this: shouldn't a photograph stand on its own? Are you saying we should include the backstory with photos? Not disagreeing, just asking. Curious for your thoughts.
I do not think it is necessary for every image to have a 'backstory', as the photographer themselves carry a lot of the story.
For instance, a photographer who only shoots 8x10 film has a backstory prevalent in every photo that they take.
A reportage photographic style relies on the subject matter for a huge part of the story.
But there are times when we do need to serve some context with the images.
I'm reminded of some photos I saw over twenty years ago. Ordinary objects; a wallet, a ring, a folded notebook. Bland, ordinary, and uninteresting items. They were photographed on a stark white background with just a hint of shadow.
Boring... Until.
The images were objects found in the rubble of the World Trade Center. Artifacts that meant nothing now carry a huge, and painful story, and they then became fascinating.
The bias is not, I think, usually thought of on a macro level, but more as an overall appreciation of the amount of effort, time, concept, or whatever... that can help set that image - or set of images - apart.
My question is this: shouldn't a photograph stand on its own? Are you saying we should include the backstory with photos? Not disagreeing, just asking. Curious for your thoughts.
Great question.
I do not think it is necessary for every image to have a 'backstory', as the photographer themselves carry a lot of the story.
For instance, a photographer who only shoots 8x10 film has a backstory prevalent in every photo that they take.
A reportage photographic style relies on the subject matter for a huge part of the story.
But there are times when we do need to serve some context with the images.
I'm reminded of some photos I saw over twenty years ago. Ordinary objects; a wallet, a ring, a folded notebook. Bland, ordinary, and uninteresting items. They were photographed on a stark white background with just a hint of shadow.
Boring... Until.
The images were objects found in the rubble of the World Trade Center. Artifacts that meant nothing now carry a huge, and painful story, and they then became fascinating.
The bias is not, I think, usually thought of on a macro level, but more as an overall appreciation of the amount of effort, time, concept, or whatever... that can help set that image - or set of images - apart.
The power of story is amazing.
Fascinating food for thought about the inherent value of a photograph.