When you look at the picture at the left what do you see? Does it tell you anything? What conclusions can you draw from it? Do you know who is in the photo? Do you know what is taking place? Do you know where it is happening? Do you know the occasion? What was he experiencing? Does it have anything to do with me? Well, I do! And that explains the reason I have been asked by family to not only digitalize my photos but to electronically label and tell the story behind the photo.
I have been encouraged and so I have undertaken the process of digitalizing my photos that were taken before that advent of electronic cameras and smart phones. As I have undergone that process I have discovered the true meaning and purposes of my photos.
Some of my children look at a photo and say, "Dad, why in the world did you take that photo. It is just like a thousand others of a pretty valley." I usually answer with something like, "Well, at the time it was an awe inspiring view that I wanted to capture." However, that is not the whole truth.
The whole truth is that many of my photos were not taken just because they were "awe inspiring" but because they were going to serve as pegs upon which I was hanging my memories of a wonderful experience or of people I wanted to be sure and not forget.
Napoleon Bonaparte is reported to have said, "A good sketch is better than a long speech." In more modern times I have been told countless times that, "A picture is worth a thousand words." I have heard all my life that "Seeing is believing" or "I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes."
I don't disagree that a picture can deliver a more concise understanding of something or seeing it the event gives one a good understanding of something but I will not agree that it presents the best understanding or a more accurate picture of the event. As I said, the photograph works better as a peg on which hangs a precious memory than it does to portray the facts of that memory.
"Why, you ask?" The answer is, "Because only in rare instances will a picture do anything more than provide a "snap shot" in time and show a physical context from which we make assumptions." What can be said of photos can also be said regarding an eye witness account. (It has repeatedly been demonstrated that two people can see the same thing and describe what they saw very differently)
To borrow a quote from Christopher Pike, "Nothing is ever as it seems." You can learn a lot from a photo but you rarely will the photo tell the whole story. The same is true of an observers account. There are many reasons for this, camera angle, perspective and lighting can make a tall man look short or visa versa; make tires on a car look as if they are turning one way and a car traveling the other; and on a really bright day black can appear white.
As Paul Harvey, who would often describe part of an event and then after a commercial break comeback on air with the line, "And now, for the rest of the story." I suggest that we always take the time to get "the rest of the story" before we form a conclusion.
It is not a matter of doubting a witnesses testimony or photographic evidence. It is a matter of getting the whole picture and that involves more than a "snap shot" in time that provides only a slice of the time of an event. Then there are times when the snap shot does tell enough that we can get a pretty good idea of what the whole story is. But unless you were present and a part of the process that led to the photo it probably doesn't really tell you anything significant about the event.
I have loads of photos of speakers at a podium and the photo tells me nothing about anything that was said by that speaker. It may identify the event, it may give clues to the venue, it may give hints at the era it was taken and the number and kind of people attending but it tells me little about the speech. Now I may draw conclusions based on the information garnered from the picture but the picture cannot verify the accuracy of those conclusions. I need what Paul Harvey called, "The rest of the story." I need to hear verbally or in print from someone who was there.
In my photos I am the person who was there so I can provide a better understanding of the significance of my photos. By the way, that's why personal photos should always have some kind of written story even if it is just the names of the people or the place in it. I suggest names of people, date and place photo taken and significance in photographers mind of the photo. Something like: "This photo is important because it reminds me of . . . ."
For me the photo can tell us a lot that I will not go into at the moment. It is a starting place but unless I tell the "rest of the story" the picture will tell you something but not everything. So take the time and give a context to your important photos. And, to paraphrase another old expression, "Never judge a book by the photo on the cover" because the story lies between the covers.
