i was reading.....

was interested in an article that i was reading. that spoke about the 'truth' of an image. and how a photograph can never identity in concrete terms this 'truth'. in a photograph we are shown a moment - a moment 'caught' 'stolen' or 'given' - and from this we are represented with certain visual details. I have though a lot about how truthful an image can be and is a huge subject for discussion. I think that an image isn't necessarily truthful, however what it does do is it lays down a mood/ feeling.

in this article there was a paticular sentence which really stuck out, as if i am honest i just DID NOT understand:

"Atmosphere and truth in flux are greater than absolutes or fixed meaning, and an antidote to the ineptitude of truth"

(i decided to highlight the words that confused me! )

WHAT A MOUTHFUL! 

so..... i decided to try simplify this, so that i understood.... and came up with:

atmosphere and truth within variation of images is much better than sticking to confines or fixed meanings. This creates a cure to the incapability of displaying truth

it still is a bit of a mouthful, but it does seem to make more sense! and i do agree with it. I think that this is why experimentation is good and i should ensure that i never feel myself falling into the confines of only producing work in a particular way.