Special Issue
century that abused of the naive belief
of the large masses of population in the
“truth” that seemed to be inherent in
pictures before we got more sensible
and learned to understand that even
photography cannot claim to be true
in principle. Moreover, there is simple
cheating by using a photograph from
another situation, another place, even
from another time and claiming that it
shows what happened here and now in
this specific place. Thus, the availability of an undoubtable and unquestionable source of a photo is the absolute
minimum requirement for its credibility.
Much more complex is the notion of the
frame, of the choice that the photographer or the cameraman makes, when
taking the picture. Even the documentary cameraman who pans and zooms
through a scene can only show a specific moment of a specific situation at a
time and we cannot know what happens
right after the camera moved on. And
the camera has an optical frame that
can only show that much of a threedimensional 360 degree of reality and
not more.
Thus we had to learn to be critical with what seemed to deliver to us
a notion of reality and to understand
that most probably there is no absolute
“truth”, to understand that “truth” is
always a subjective limitation of the
overall reality, as perceived by the person reporting to us on the reality, and
that thus we always have to ask back
who made the pictures, with what intentions in mind and what kind of values they represent.
So, as you can see, photography
plays a huge role in shaping human and
cultural development with no difference between the rest of the world and
the Eastern Partnership countries.
That is why a project like SAY CHEESE!
can have a vast spectrum of activities
and can reach beyond promoting the
mere craft of photographers. A project
on photography can involve very large
audiences, for instance by building their
awareness of the role that photography
and images play in our society and in
shaping their senses to identify the intention that either the photographer
had, when he made the picture, or that
the publisher has, by using this specific
picture. Audiences have to be taught to
“read” pictures. By understanding the
frame that has been chosen, by understanding the angle of the camera that
Low angle
High angle
Normal angle
has been chosen, by understanding the
context in which photos are presented,
and so on, and so forth, we can get indications regarding the photos that we
see like: are they honest, are they true
in a sense that they transparently show
their intention(s)? Or are they false, do
they hide their intentions? Are they
manipulative and aimed to divert our
attention away from something? Are
they propagandistic because they adopt
a very selective point of view, hiding
relevant parts of reality?
I could continue this exercise: education of audiences in “reading” pictures nowadays includes many, very
many sectors of our daily life: is the better world or the better kind of life that an
advertisement shows us really so much
better that we should strive for it, or are
we shown an ideal that once analysed
closely is not that much worth spending
59