The human eye sees differently than a camera lens, both in an
optical sense, and in a figurative sense. Besides the differences
in focusing and perspective which are
listed below, there are also differences in color perception
and interpretation.
(This issue of color is addressed in my previous
"Pastel Techniques" page on this,
as well as in the next few pages, of this "Art Notes" tour..)
Some of the differences are:
- The focusing mechanisms of cameras and eyes are different
- the eye is a single maleable lens which performs all
of the focusing operations
- a camera uses sets of hard lenses adjusted by
altering the separation distance
- The eye is connected to the human brain which
perceives the entire image as being simultaneously in-focus....
not true of a camera!
- Our eyes (and head) are constantly moving, often imperceptibly,
but our minds integrate over all this data and forms from it
a mental image of the reality surrounding us.
- This movement also reveals the sides of objects which
persists in the brain's memory, and allows it to create
a temporary impression of visual depth.
- Human eyes come in pairs! Binocular vision allows us
to see around objects, this (along with eye motion)
makes our vision dynamic, rather than static, whereas the
single lens of a camera tends to flatten out an image.
You may find illustration of these principles in my
portraiture.
Thus the eye perceives reality quite differently from a camera.
Both photographers and artists take advantage of these
differences to create an artistic sense in their images.
The methods are different, although the goals are the same.
When photography was first invented in the 19th century, the
world was intrigued by this new way of seeing. Artists
even began experimenting with making paintings that used the
same perspective as a camera lens.
(For recommended books on perspective click here.)
If you compare paintings
done in that time period -- the one style being called "realism"
and the other, new style, "photorealism" --
you should immediately see the difference between the two.
You should note that modern photorealism has evolved into
something slightly different over the intervening years.
I hope to find some classic paintings from the 19th century
to demonstrate what I am talking about...
Ultimately, however, it is the artist himself who determines the
difference between a painting and photograph. Although both
appear to represent a real time and place, they are both
interpretations of reality. Between the audience and
the reality, stands the artist holding either a brush or a
set of lenses.
Whether we are speaking of art, or solving a Schrodinger
wave equation in physics, or the philosophy of science (e.g.,
as by Polyani), the fact remains that the observer
interprets what is seen, and indeed affects it.
The artist expresses something of himself in each and every
painting: He expresses how he is feeling today, how he feels
about his subject, and also the character of the subject itself.
In photographic art, the artist uses techniques of composition,
lighting, and focusing, as well as special filters and darkroom
techniques, to induce these feelings or moods in the image.
The painter uses many similar techniques, but has even greater
control over expression. He can subtly alter color, light
and shadow, focus and contrast, and even the placement of objects.
Together, these can convey the mood of the setting, or
even additional information about the subject. (Yes, in
skilled hands, a painting can even be more
informative than a photograph.)
These methods can be used to either enhance a sense
of realism, or bend it toward abstraction.... these are
also different ways of seeing.
