Digital Deception

Assignment 9......again

The first known photograph was made by a French physicist named Joseph Nicéphore in 1816. Little did he know that his work, along with that of others’, would result in the creation of a communication tool that was to become as powerful and significant as the printing press. Photographs were considered incontestable proof of an event, experience, or state of being. But what if pictures weren’t what they seemed? What if they were capable of deceiving the untrained eye? By the end of the 20th century, digital imaging and processing and computer-based techniques made it possible to manipulate images in many ways, creating revolutionary changes in photography. The ability to manipulate pictures has major implications for the concept of truth.

A picture may be worth a thousand words, but what good are those words if they’re not true? Social psychological studies have shown that lying is a frequent part of everyday social interactions. In fact, research suggests that as many as one third of these typical daily interactions involve some form of deception (Hancock, Thom-Santelli, Ritchie, 2004). Deception can range anywhere from a slight exaggeration to an outright lie. According to Nyberg a lie can be classified as a subcategory of deception, though it has its own complexity as an adaptive behavior (Nyberg 1993). Photo-manipulation presents an interesting predicament because there are varying degrees of modification. It is possible to slightly alter a picture to better “capture the moment,” but it is also possible to merge photos in order to create documentation for situations that never took place. Nyberg further describes deception as the controlling of what is perceived, assumed, or understood by means of showing or hiding information (Nyberg, 1993). In his book, “The Varnished Truth,” Nyberg explains that an actual lie has four parts: a written or spoken statement, the speaker’s belief that the statement is false, the intention to lie, and the character or rights of the person being lied to. Some photos that have been manipulated may be deceiving in the sense that they don’t necessarily represent truth, but would this equate to a verbal lie? Blurring the background in a basketball action photo to create a sense of movement has different implications of truth than digitally removing blemishes from pictures of furniture meant to be sold on eBay, which may be more associated with a verbal lie.

Nyberg’s description of deception as “the shrewd and somber art of ‘showing and hiding’” brings up some interesting details. “The point is to present a situation in a way that will encourage a person to develop a confident, but mistaken hypothesis, which in some way serves our purpose” (Nyberg, 1993). The various ways of hiding and showing are relevant to deception in photographs because they involve many of the techniques used to manipulate a photo. Nyberg cites various ways to hide (disappear, disguise, distract) and show (mimic, counterfeit, misdirect). This framework was originally designed for verbal communication, but with the introduction of photo manipulation, could this framework also be adapted for visual communication? Nyberg’s framework will help us define when a photograph is being deceptive, or if the information in the photograph is just being managed improperly.

Manipulating a photograph has not always been easy to do. Altering pictures in the darkroom was always feasible, but with the advent of digital technology and resources afforded in an online setting, manipulation has become even easier. Not to mention, the extent of alteration has reached heights that were never thought possible. With the click of a mouse, something or someone can be cropped out of a picture, leaving the viewer to interpret whatever is left at face value. Deception can be established in photographs in several ways; a photograph can be manipulated either before, during, or after it is taken. For example, a photograph can be staged before it is taken, the camera angle can be altered while it is being taken, or Adobe Photoshop can be used to alter the picture after it’s been taken. It is also important to note that it is not only the photographer who can alter a photo, but the subject can be altered as well. That is, the photographer can change the camera settings or modify the physical picture or the person or object being photographed can be transformed. This ease of editability should, in theory, undermine the credibility of photographs; however, it is important to understand that a photograph’s meaning may vary with context. “A picture on a newspaper front page has more assertional force than it will hanging in an art gallery” (Martin, 1987).

The techniques used for photo-manipulation are infinite and photos can be staged or altered after a picture is taken. With digital photography, a photographer takes a picture, and the images are transferred to a computer. At this point, the picture can be edited using a manipulation software package, such as Adobe Photoshop. Photoshop allows for pictures to be cropped, blurred, lightened, darkened, stitched to another photo, and with some training it even allows for adding or erasing something or someone from a picture. Staging a picture may involve camera angle, zoom, or simply setting up the scene (not candid). Photographs were once considered incontestable proof, but maybe, “the camera has always been a liar, especially in the hands of a capable photographer” (Henshall, 1998). Why is it then that we still believe what we see in photographs?

posted by Nicole @ 4:29 PM