Does “Photographic Realism” really exist?

[Heroique]

If “Photographic Realism” exists, have you captured it (or seen it) on film or paper?

What convinced you of its presence?

Or if it doesn’t exist, help us understand why.

Does “Realism” have an easier time in other arts, such as painting?

[Jay DeFehr]

If your question is; does photographic realism exist?, we need to know how you define the term, or you run straight down the "does reality exist" rabbit hole.

What's really on your mind?

[Sevo]

Well, Photographic Realism (a.k.a. Photorealism) has been a important artistic movement in painting and sculpture, starting in the late sixties, along with the rise of photography to an art form. How about a visit to the library? Ever since then there have been plenty of learned writings on the reality and realism of and in painting and photographs...

[Heroique]

Whoops, I mean “photographic realism” as an informal, conversational term, not necessarily a formal term of criticism or metaphysics.

For example, if someone at a museum exhibition (or looking through your portfolio) told you that a particular photograph showed “photographic realism,” how would your understanding of the term influence your reply?

Would you have already asked yourself what makes a photograph “realistic”? How important are the photographer’s aims in the matter, if at all? Is the claim merely a personal judgment, or one that might win a degree of objective approval?

[Jay DeFehr]

For example, if someone at a museum exhibition (or looking through your portfolio) told you that a particular photograph showed “photographic realism,” how would your understanding of the term influence your reply?

I would assume the person had little/no understanding of the terminology he was using, and politely nudge my portfolio from his hands. His comment would mean about as much to me as if he'd substituted "camera-ness" for "photographic realism".

I'm still not sure what you're getting at. Are you asking what are the attributes of a 2D image that might cause a viewer to mistake the image for the thing imaged? As in, "Wow! That photo of an apple looks like a real apple!"?

[Jim Michael]

Would a physical reaction to a 3D image, or more likely a 3D video clip, constitute photographic realism in your mind? E.g. you duck when the spear appears to come at you.

[Brian C. Miller]

Whoops, I mean “photographic realism” as an informal, conversational term, not necessarily a formal term of criticism or metaphysics.

For example, if someone at a museum exhibition (or looking through your portfolio) told you that a particular photograph showed “photographic realism,” how would your understanding of the term influence your reply?

I would reply, "Oh, that's nice." And I would wonder, "What the hey? It's a photograph." Any well-exposed, sharp photograph shows "photographic realism." It's just what it does. The real question is when it doesn't show "realism."

Consider this image:


What does it show? A building, yes. Now, how close to "reality" do you think it is? When was the sky that color? When was the building that color, and should shadows be white? The clouds are a shade of blue. Yet you know that this is a photograph, genuine and unaltered. It is a Fuji Instax FP-100C print. But that isn't reality, is it? Are buildings built upon an abyss of black?

Or perhaps I yanked the darkslide without closing the lens first, and I realized my mistake partway through. (but now I know how interesting Fuji can get.)

Now consider this:


Uh, looks decently real, like okay, eh? Blooming shrub out in the landlord's yard. Pretty normal. Same film, but it sure doesn't invoke images of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Photo looks real. Duh.

[Heroique]

Would a physical reaction to a 3D image, or more likely a 3D video clip, constitute photographic realism in your mind? E.g. you duck when the spear appears to come at you.

This reminds me of the famous contest between the ancient Greek painters, Zeuxis and Parrhasius. Which could paint most realistically? Zeuxis painted grapes so real that birds flocked down to peck at the fruit. Hard to top that! Except that when Zeuxis asked Parrhasius to draw the curtain to show his own painting, Parrhasius revealed that the curtain itself was his painting! Parrhasius won – but it would seem that realism, by Jim’s test above, existed in both works. Makes me curious if a bird has ever tried to fly through anyone’s LF print of a landscape, proving a high level of photographic realism...

[Brian C. Miller]

Makes me curious if a bird has ever tried to fly through anyone’s LF print of a landscape, proving a high level of photographic realism...

Simple: photograph, from the outside, a window that's open. Now print that life-sized, and put it next to the original window, but close the window and pull the blinds. See if any birds smack into the photograph.

[Jay DeFehr]

The paltry spectral sensitivities of our best films don't come close to matching the vision of a pigeon.