But although “pictures” may be made by photographic means, the art of the painter is not readily comparable to the art of the photographer. The photographer does not take a pencil of light and draw with it as the “artist” draws with his pencils, but he so regulates his apparatus that the light itself shall do the drawing. The two cases are fundamentally different. The most important characteristic of photography is that it is so largely automatic. And besides this, if from the present moment all “picture” making means of photography were to cease, photography would still continue to be practiced as one of the most useful of the applied sciences.
It is sometimes argued that it is not necessary to understand the principles upon which photography is founded, because it is sufficient to be provided with a Kodak or other such camera, and to follow the instructions, to get quite acceptable pictures. It is equally true that one only need the barrel organ or musical box and to follow the instructions to get quite acceptable music. And the use of a Kodak gives its possessor less insight into photography than the use of a musical box can into the subject and practice of music, so far as it is possible to compare the two. (17-18)
Sometimes we are met with the question: Can photography lie? And we hear at different times an emphatic yes, and an equally emphatic no, given in reply. Of course photography cannot lie, because all photographic results are due to the effects of the unchanging laws of nature. But a person may be mislead by a photograph, just as he may be mislead by a document, by reason of his won ability to understand it. And a photographer may set himself to produce a deceptive photograph, seeking to gain a dishonest advantage for himself or his customer. But a photograph, so long as it is a photograph and is not sophisticated by hand-painting or other processes, must always have a definite relationship to the thing photographed, according to the conditions under which the photograph was produced. In critical cases it is no more than fair that photographs should be interpreted, when disputes or doubts arise, by those who have studied the subject, just as a legal document is taken to a court of justice when a final opinion is required as to its meaning.
The honest photographer, so far as he is really honest, endeavors to be transparently honest, and to produce work that not only is right, but that appears to be right. This is the aim of all honest persons who have to record facts. But it is astonishing how liable a man who has the very best intentions is to deceive through want of care. And on the other hand, many persons would be surprised if they knew how easily they can be deceived. These are commonplace facts that concern every phase and detail of life, including photography. If the casual observer looks at the illustrations facing page 256, it will seem to him absurd to suggest that the letters L I F E are upright . . .the real fault is in the observer, who does not see the facts as they are. Nevertheless, a photographer who produced a picture that was strictly correct, if it produced a false impression in the minds of a large proportion of those who saw it, would merit blame, because it is the duty of one who records the facts to do his best to demonstrate them also. Indeed, in some matters one might be inclined to allow a little license in fact, if the impression produced is correct, but in photography this is not permissible. The facts should be correctly recorded, fundamentally and absolutely, and a skillful and honest photographer will see that is record is not likely to produce any false idea.
A photograph always records a fact. A thought or an idea may be expressed in various ways, but never by photography. We cannot photograph unless there is a thing to be photographed, and all that a photograph can do is represent that thing. A person may be dressed up to represent Hamlet, and he may be photographed. The photograph is not of Hamlet, but only the person dressed to represent him, and whatever merit there may be in the picture as reminding one of Hamlet, has to do with the person and the dressing and not the photography.
That a photograph always represents facts and nothing else but facts, is its chief characteristic. (264-266)
Photography of Today: A Popular Account of the Origin, Progress, and Latest Discoveries in the Photographer’s Art, Told in Non-Technical Language by H. Chapman Jones (1923)
