Which Lens?

We have different opinions on things, from good things to interesting things, to those that have a direct effect on our lives. I want to discuss whether an experience is viewed differently, be it for the better or worse, with the addition of a camera lens or just with the lens’ of your own eyes in the present.

I recently took a trip to India on a whim, I had a whole summer off from university so it seemed fitting. Numerous times I have traveled and not documented what I had seen, but this time I wanted to put more effort in to capturing what I saw. So, with these photos and my experience, I thought I’d share my view.

To anyone who has been to India, it is a complete sensory overload; the pungent smells, the exhaust fumes, the incessant car horns, the shouting, and with all this comes the heat and humidity. You look everywhere and there exists something you've never seen before; cows in the road, donkeys relaxing in the mid-day sun, ten people squeezed in an auto-rickshaw.

So of course, these sensory experiences wouldn't t be perceivable through a picture, yet accompany many peoples vision whilst being there, which adds a different experience entirely. However, as I mentioned earlier, it was the visionary aspect that grew on me.

Everything that you, yourself see, is pretty much what you get - there are no otherworldly effects (unless taking substances that alter your mental state count). You can in effect do anything with a camera lens, be it zooming in or out or even taking advantage of the technology of the modern age. For example you can rebel against still imaging and alter the shutter speed to give a contrast between fast and slow.

I think experiencing the present moment, or as some say ‘live in the now’, is an important part of life, focussing solely on what is in front of you. This helps add perspective to life and to appreciate the natural state. However, by adding that extra lens, indirectly it adds an alternative dimension to what we are able to see.

There exists a different beauty to photo images than what is seen through your own eyes. In particular still shots, where no altercation of the shutter speed for the elements has been brought in, just a plain image. Taking only a few moments to edit the photo can bring out something, in my opinion, far more pronounced and stunning to the eye. And this is the point I want to make.

Being in India was a brilliant experience. It was indeed something I’m grateful to have done, but it wasn't plain sailing throughout. Was what I saw and have in my memory all that of a visual delight? Perhaps it was a mixture, but by having the chance to edit the photographs, you can truly enhance the experience. This is not a cynical view, but more so on the brilliance of the digital photography age in which we live.

I haven’t heard of Arnold Newman, not up until a few weeks ago, nor have I seen much of his work, but I think this quote fits perfectly with this article, ‘Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of reality with which we create our own private world.’ As long as that illusion brings to us something positive in our life, it being real or not matters little.