Fred Ritchin’s After Photography

 In this reading, what I immediately found interesting was the different point of views when it comes to photography. Specifically, what really had me thinking and going back on was the difference between analog and digital photography. In the reading, analog photography was in a sense, described as a tease. Analog photography in essence makes you keep going because it is the unknown. You don't know for sure if the image you took is the right image or even the best image. You keep shooting until your film runs out and when you get to the dark room, as your images are developing, it's like holding your breath. Once the development is done, you are able to breathe again and see the product of your image. With digital photography, everything is right there on your screen. You are able to delete, switch angles, manipulate lighting and more; all because of the easy access. Digital photography was described as "discrete". It is only a part of what the whole is. Especially with it being in color most of the time, digital photography gives us a time and place and allows us to contextualize, analyze, and evaluate what the image means especially with its connection to the past, present, and the future. 

A quote that instantly caught my attention was right at the beginning of the reading when William J. Mitchell was describing the difference between analog and digital photography, he said that for analog photography, it is like "rolling down a ramp is continuous motion" and for digital, it is like "walking down stairs is a sequence of discrete steps". He goes on to say that "you can count the number of steps but not the number of levels on the ramp". I think this goes into the idea that digital photography has many layers to it but also we are able to strip away every step to get a deeper understanding of the image.

Another quote that is less complex but stuck to me was when Ritchin said that "reality has no single truth". This statement alone to me holds a strong truth under it. When it comes to reality, we can never say what really is because everyone's perception of their reality differs from person to person. With photography, the "reality" or state in which the image was taken can be contextualized and analyzed in different ways. For example, when the U.S. invaded Haiti in 1994, the original image viewed, showcased America being heroic and patriotic. In another image from the same scene, the soldiers are seen pointing their rifles at Haitians, changing the meaning of the image and what the U.S. stands for. The reality of the first image showed soldiers were patriots and putting their live on the for America. The context, because of the reality portrayed gave America a positive outlook. In the second image, the reality showed the American soldiers pointing their rifles towards Haitian citizens. The context now shifted showing the violence of war instead of the heroism that was first depicted. From one side, the reality looked one way but from another point of view, the reality completely shifted. Reality could look truthful from one stance but be different from a different perspective.