Book Review: Photography After Photography
I LOVE getting art books from my favourite bookshops in the city, and I hope that bookshops as a venue for the discovery of awesomely bound volumes of literature and art of the graphic and fine varieties alike stay around a while longer – even as the digital age threatens to sweep those institutions away.
Which is ironic that I’m fearing this while I’m reading Photography After Photography: Memory and Representation In The Digital Age. It’s a book from the 1990s. a time capsule that while seeming quaint in some areas – present concerns that are still all too real now. It’s a (very) early history of digital photography and the directions it was predicted to go in at the time it was written. At the time it was written, JPG. was considered the standard for digital photo formats, and machines that digitised photos cost up to $20,000 dollars as the book reports.
And admittedly, in the early days of digital photography when this book came out (i.e., the first four years of my life or so) nob0dy could have seen the digital revolution of technology in photography coming. This book is dated in the sense that it doesn’t really know how the internet and Wikileaks would later change the face of photos taken in authoritarian regimes leaking to democratic countries, but it is eerie to see how concerned human beings as a species in general were concerned that machines and technology would consume our humanity, consume our identity – generally de-humanising us rather than giving us a photographic record of our lives that was tangible. Jurassic Park and Terminator 2: Judgement Day are almost harbingers of the apocalypse to the authentic, trustworthy photographic image, and Photoshop’s shadow over journalistic integrity are yet to be felt. It is a strange experience indeed to view the all to recent past in the present, it’s like reading your horoscope from 1993 in the year 2011. It’s not exactly going to be in date even if you believe in it, but it’s a talisman from a very nebulous academic period where a Jetsons-inspired tech based future was as eagerly anticipated as it was feared.
This book is the story, an incomplete story as it may be, of a photography changing formats from analogue to digital, and how this sweeping change terrified as much as it excited practitioners of photography at the time. It was a strange era, where technology could have destroyed us as much as it could have saved us. In an era with no true ideological enemy, academia focused its targeting sights on technology, which they feared was making humanity change faster than it could evolve. Analogue photography is today threatened to be phased out, much to the despair of hipsters who post on their Tumblr.com blogs their Lomography shots with their toy cameras loaded with film ammunition that allows the user to shoot for the kill they can bring back to their blog to display to their digital caveman tribe.
There is much worrying over the fate of analogue photography, and analogue film stock these days. When (not if) it completely disappears from both amateur and professional practice, will the children my generation raise even understand that there used to be a time when “running out of film” wasn’t a matter of how much space you have on your DSLR’s memory card? Will my children, God help me to even imagine that happening to me when I haven’t even had my first love yet, even know what it was like to physically hold a negative of film as something that could be destroyed instead of infinitely reproducible from copies of copies, as losseless file formats allow digital photography and video to become more convenient to copy and paste than ever?
This book is a walk through history, a revelation from my early childhood – when the world was still young to me and I wasn’t old enough to take an interest in academia that was researched and catalogued like this. There are artists who are showcased in this book that I’ve seen in high school art textbooks before, and even though I’ve never seen or read this book before my art school Photomedia degree, it seems all so familiar, like some of the artists were old friends whom seeing makes you feel so young again. It’s like I’m finally old enough to listen to what all this theory stuff had to say, what it meant for the world it came from and what it continues to mean for the world we now live in. As dated as some of this is, compared to other books I’ve borrowed and returned from my art school campus library, this one alone had some legit staying power as a document history that could use a revisited sequel volume for our post Wikileaks and social networking world.
I’ve enjoyed reading this book of academic theory like no other, it goes through not just recent Photography and Media history, covering key points in the 1990s where media was first touched by scandals of image retouching and manipulating, but it teaches you truths that photography has been lying to you long before Photoshop came to the scene. Photos have been lying you since your granddaddy’s day, Frank Capa lied to you now and again, dictators lied to you, even colonial Britain used the limited technologies of the time with their antique cameras to lie their asses off.
It is the story of how we assumed that photography told the truth as it began to be distrusted, when really we shouldn’t have trusted it at face value to begin with… but as a medium, photography presents its own opportunities and challenges for a post-digital humanity and future. And I’d recommend it as one of the spur-of-the-moment academic responses that held up better than a lot of opportunistic theses on the subject of digital photography at the time.






