KenS
Allowing Ads
A photograph might also best be described as 'two dimensional' record of a three-dimensional 'world'
Ken
Ken
Only if the presence of the mustache is "material" - a major component of the offence of perjury.Word games. If you cloned a mustache on the photo and submitted as evidence, the judge would throw you into jail for perjury.
You have made me feel badly if you think that I have called into question your nearly 40 years of using light meter or sunny11. I did not. Clearly the picture was composed and exposed as you wished and perfectly well done for that picture. I was however suggesting if the tree trunk was the object then a better set of choices could have been made for that purpose; Just the tree trunk.
Even so, I still do, in fact, see the tree trunk, just to the left of the door is a white line and then to the left of that, black; the trunk. The fact that in between the tree and the lens is a combination of things, rain, twigs, mist, dirty window, what ever, does not make this a metaphysical photograph. Actually more of a pictorialist picture, I think
You're insisting on driving an epistemological debate of principles into the smallest, narrowest pragmatic terms possible. You're getting into the realm of object permanence - If you submitted the photo with the cloned mustache and I presented one without a mustache, and shaved my mustache so that I looked like the second photo, you would be in trouble only if you insisted that the one with the mustache was in fact NOT me. As if the addition of the mustache so fundamentally altered "ME" that it was incapable of representing me, or that with the mustache, I was incapable of BEING me, when in fact my identity is not in any way tied to the photograph with or without the mustache.Word games. If you cloned a mustache on the photo and submitted as evidence, the judge would throw you into jail for perjury.
A photograph might also best be described as 'two dimensional' record of a three-dimensional 'world'
Ken
Ever heard of Flatlanders?
More word games. OK. Let's say the photographer photoshopped the knife out of the killer's hand? Would that be enough unreal and untruthful for you? If he lied about it on the stand, should the judge throw him in to jail for perjury?You're insisting on driving an epistemological debate of principles into the smallest, narrowest pragmatic terms possible. You're getting into the realm of object permanence - If you submitted the photo with the cloned mustache and I presented one without a mustache, and shaved my mustache so that I looked like the second photo, you would be in trouble only if you insisted that the one with the mustache was in fact NOT me. As if the addition of the mustache so fundamentally altered "ME" that it was incapable of representing me, or that with the mustache, I was incapable of BEING me, when in fact my identity is not in any way tied to the photograph with or without the mustache.
Why the obsession with forensic photography?More word games. OK. Let's say the photographer photoshopped the knife out of the killer's hand? Would that be enough unreal and untruthful for you? If he lied about it on the stand, should the judge throw him in to jail for perjury?
is a photograph or photography ( generally speaking i don't care of the format, or language ( digital or analog )
supposed to be reality ?
First of all, that kind of photo virtually never exists - for the photographer to have captured the knife in the killer's hands he would have had to be an accomplice to the crime or at least an accessory after the fact.More word games. OK. Let's say the photographer photoshopped the knife out of the killer's hand? Would that be enough unreal and untruthful for you? If he lied about it on the stand, should the judge throw him in to jail for perjury?
Consciousness and thought are but electrical impulses.Photographs are part of reality. I do wonder about images created by electronic impulses and stored on a hard drive. I suppose potentiality is part of reality. too.
But is what goes in our heads real? Or just a model of reality we create in our heads to be able to handle it? I vote for the latter with a nod to the reality that is in our heads. Fun stuff.Consciousness and thought are but electrical impulses.
Last time I checked it's the only reality we know.But is what goes in our heads real?
But is what goes in our heads real? Or just a model of reality we create in our heads to be able to handle it? I vote for the latter with a nod to the reality that is in our heads. Fun stuff.
it wasn't a knife thoughWhen the judge puts you in jail for lying about how you cloned out the knife in the killer's hand, you'll have plenty of time to think about what's real and unreal, truthful and untruthful.
The standard of proof in criminal cases is beyond a reasonable doubt. There is a whole lot of daylight between that and the truth, so it is a bit of a kludge. I'll not be relying on judges and juries for defining reality for me.When the judge puts you in jail for lying about how you cloned out the knife in the killer's hand, you'll have plenty of time to think about what's real and unreal, truthful and untruthful.
Last time I checked it's the only reality we know.
When the judge puts you in jail for lying about how you cloned out the knife in the killer's hand, you'll have plenty of time to think about what's real and unreal, truthful and untruthful.
But we each have our own reality in that case...which is probably the case.Last time I checked it's the only reality we know.
Some is, some is not. I can’t believe this is even a question,
I think you've lived in Washington DC too long where no one there knows the truth.
Are you going to argue that the above photograph is "reality"? That that house is that color, and that brightness, and that the verticals on it bend, and that the wood, brick, stone, grass and sky all have the texture of paper fiber? Yes, it is sufficiently realistic that if you were to go to that location, you would recognize the building, But it is not a precise, accurate representation of the building.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?