. . . is actually a set-up. It treats the six photographers as fools. I’m really surprised they didn’t get pissed. I sure did.
On the other hand, the comments section is fabulous. I reproduce it in full, here.
Hmmmm . . . how often is what we view or read about as “the news,” whether MSM or alternative, actually a set-up? And how often to we “show” ourselves to others (or even to ourself in the mirror) wearing a mask? Is it possible to take all the masks off? How do we know they’re all off?
In any interaction with another human being: there’s
- who we really are (do we know?)
- who we pretend to be (do we always (ever?) know we are pretending?)
- who the person really is who is viewing and interacting with us (does he/she know?)
- who he/she pretends to be (does he/she always (ever?) know he or she is pretending?)
- the spatial frame: any frame, no matter its shape, or how large or small, specifies a context which shifts anyone’s (relative) perception of the foreground. (Gestalt theory 101).
- the temporal frame: ditto #5.
Which is why there’s no such thing as objectivity in science, nor is there such a thing as a “controlled experiment” that actually describes “reality,” which is ever moving, shifting changing, in endlessly mysterious ways.
Even so, the video does to some extent indicate the relativity of perception. And, as I said, the comments are good, even if they too, seem to be infected with scientism: the possibility of “objectivity,” and a more accurate “controlled experiment” that would indeed mirror reality.
November 4, 2015
by Cynthia Boylan
As the revealing video below shows, portraits can be shaped by the photographer’s point of view rather than just by the subject being documented. Created by The Lab in conjunction with Canon Australia, the clip features six photographers, one portrait subject and an unexpected twist. The twist consisted of the (mis)information each photographer was given regarding the person being photographed.
The photographers entered the studio individually and were told a bit about the subject, whose name is Michael. The fictional back stories on Michael ranged from him being a self-made millionaire to a hero, ex-inmate, fisherman, psychic and a former alcoholic.
In reality, he is none of those things. Consquently, their finished portraits range wildly in style and context.
The video, called “The Decoy,” runs about three-minutes and is a very eye-opening experience in that it makes us stop and rethink how portraits should be created.
This video doesn’t prove that the photographer’s point of view shapes the portrait taken since there was in fact a different character in front of each photographer.
I bet that even if this man was just himself, the photographers would’ve taken different portraits just because of their personal style, though. (This is why you have to make sure you like the style of the photographer you pick.)