Why Digital Photography Never
Happened
Bill Davis
Western Michigan University
School of Art
College of Fine Arts
1903 Western Michigan
University
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008-5213
This
essay profiles and clarifies the intents and functions of the photographic and
digital image. While both have a past and a future, neither can take the place
of the other. In essence a digital photograph is not a photograph. That is why
digital photography never happened. Calling the photograph "digital"
happened. If this seems too simple, then it needs to be. Cameras and computers
give us images. One is photographic and the other is digital. Thus there are
but two separate and distinct categories under which we now point and click:
digital imagery and photographic imagery. One converts silver, one sprays ink,
one lives longer, one fades faster, one gets wet, one stays dry, one acts
actual, one acts virtual, one compresses light, one expands light, and most
critically- they're made differently. Thus their dissimilar identities and
structures naturally conflict. If their properties defy each other, why then is
the photograph called digital? While the answer that question seeks is
multi-faceted, there are ways to focus on the presence and co-existence of
these two types of imagery.
The
computer leads us to the digital image and the camera leads us to the
photographic one. Each machine has a different intent. However, to understand
intent we must first look at history. Which came first- the computer or the
photograph? An answer to that question requires a review of the following
criterial definitions: Computer- An
(electronic) device that accepts, processes, stores, and outputs data at high
speeds according to programmed instructions. Digit- A system that represents a number in any number system.
It could be a system between 0-255 as it is with the popular RGB color scale or
0-100 as it is with the popular grayscale. Photograph- A picture or likeness recorded on a camera and
reproduced on a photosensitive substrate. Digital Image- The binary discontinuous compression of a continuous
image into an algorithmic map of quantifiable numbers.
While
the 150th anniversary of photography was celebrated in 1989, the 159th was
celebrated for the computer. Although it may seem oblique, the popular computer
model used today precedes the photographic one by 9 years. Charles Babbage
introduced automated computation before Daguerre introduced photography. In
that context, the photographic darkroom print may become more appreciable than
the digital inkjet print. Perhaps this is due to the photography's greater
demand for manual handcrafted labor. If something appreciates, then it grows in
value. Many artists mistake their industry's technological growth for their own
creative growth. Yet upgrades in technology often downgrade creativity and few
artists use that technology responsibly.
Photographic
and digital imagery both have futures. To what degree those futures prosper is
solely up to the communities who use them. It is the challenge of this
generation to protect, preserve, appreciate, and advance each one. Photography
is being identified in ways that contradict its intent and history. This false
identity should cause concern. In conjunction with the accompanying image
projections and outline below, one should meditate on the nature and rich
history of these oppositional identities. Digital artists work with the virtual
and photographic artists work with the actual. These divergent practices affect
the artist, their work, and their audience in ways that polarize the digital
image from the photographic. Each process requires a different kind of
attention. Digital images stimulate viewers to think virtually while
photographic images stimulate them to think actually. Yet can actual be more
trusted than virtual? In that answer may be the reasons for one's own approach
to viewing these differing mediums. Neither process shadows nor echoes the
other. "Digital" is not better than photography. "Digital" is different than photography. Acknowledgment of their differences and
histories may guarantee their futures.
While
two of the greatest pioneers in the early fields of computers and photography
worked closely together, neither knew the other would leave us with such
systemic use of their contributions. Sir John Herschel and Charles Babbage were
close colleagues and personal friends whose collective work left us with the
photographic and digital image making options used today. This makes their
relationship as valid as their legacies and contributions, which are further
identified in the accompanying multimedia presentation. Through their research
one may better gauge their own responsibility in historicizing, defining, and
creating future digital and/or photographic imagery. Theirs is a legacy worth
advancement and preservation.